Chikkenkoppada Channaveera Sharanara Andhara Kalyan Ashram and anr. Vs. State of Karnataka Represented by Its Secretary, Home Department and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
constitution of india - articles 226 and 227-writ of mandamus - prayer sought - direction to make alternate arrangements in hubli such as nehru ground or railway ground or any other suitable places to hold rallies, satyagrahas, protests, public meetings etc,. - held, court can not assume the role of executive - the court must remind itself to adhere to the concept of separation of powers even though the constitution does not provide specifically for separation of powers in the strict sense. the court must remind itself about the rule of self-restraint and permit the statutory functionaries to perform their duties unless otherwise there is apparent failure on the part of the executive to perform their duties because courts are not experts in the public administration. - on facts, held, the.....orderp.d. dinakaran, c.j.1. there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. we have heard the learned government advocate.2. the first petitioner is a trust registered under the karnataka societies registration act and the second petitioner is a citizen's forum. both of them have approached this court complaining that public functions such as bundhs, hurtles, strikes, gheraos, processions, rallies, protests and other political gatherings are permitted near rani chennamma circle in hubli causing disturbance to the traffic and put the public at large in great inconvenience.3. petitioners are seeking a writ of mandamus to respondents, who are state of karnataka, deputy commissioner of dharwad and police commissioner of hubli to make alternate arrangements for all those activities.....

Judgment:
ORDER

P.D. Dinakaran, C.J.

1. There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. We have heard the learned Government Advocate.

2. The first petitioner is a Trust registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act and the second petitioner is a Citizen's Forum. Both of them have approached this Court complaining that public functions such as bundhs, hurtles, strikes, gheraos, processions, rallies, protests and other political gatherings are permitted near Rani Chennamma Circle in Hubli causing disturbance to the traffic and put the public at large in great inconvenience.

3. Petitioners are seeking a Writ of Mandamus to respondents, who are State of Karnataka, Deputy Commissioner of Dharwad and Police Commissioner of Hubli to make alternate arrangements for all those activities either in Nehru ground or Railway ground or any other suitable place at Hubli.

4. In our considered opinion, the power to regulate grant of license for conducting public agitations, rallies, protests, public meetings etc., lie within the purview of the executive. Although our constitution does not specifically provide for separation of powers in strict sense of the term the Court cannot, therefore, assume the role of the executive to regulate these issues.

5. The Court must remind itself to adhere to the concept of separation of powers even though the Constitution does not provide specifically for separation of powers in the strict sense. The Court must remind itself about the rule of self-restraint and permit the statutory functionaries to perform their duties unless otherwise there is apparent failure on the part of the executive to perform their duties because Courts are not experts in the public administration.

6. Therefore, it is suffice to observe that the respondents shall take stock of the peace, tranquility and public interest at large while considering the application for holding public agitations, rallies, protests, public meetings, hurtles etc, and regulate the grant of license under relevant statutes by imposing appropriate terms and conditions as deemed fit and necessary with reference to the time, date and place.

7. Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.