CoP to look into plea to delist Valluvar Kottam as protest site

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court sought Chennai police Commissioner to consider and decide on a plea moved by Lake Area Residents’ Association in Nungambakkam to remove the area near Valluvar Kottam from the list of approved places for conducting fasts/dharnas and protests.

The first bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice PD Audikesavalu, said “The petitioner association’s grievance is that a particular place has been earmarked for public gatherings but the experience of the local residents is quite harrowing as the roads are completely blocked and access to individual buildings, even on foot, is impeded, leave alone vehicular access.

“The petitioner association makes it a point that this petition does not pertain to complaints on hygiene, crowd, or noise or even visual pollution; the petitioner association’s only concern is that the local residents should have unrestricted ingress to and egress from their properties and large gatherings of the kind complained of do not always leave room even for such minor facilities,” the bench recorded.

Noting that it appeared that the petitioner association had made representations to some of the authorities but they have not been taken up for consideration, the bench said, “It would be appropriate to request the Commissioner of Police, Chennai, to consider the petitioner’s representation and take a decision on the matter.”

However, the bench made it clear that nothing in the order should influence the Commissioner either way, adding that the decision should be taken in public interest and also keeping the interest of the local residents in mind.

“Accordingly, the plea is disposed of by permitting the petitioner body or any group of the local residents to carry a fresh, detailed representation to the Commissioner of Police, Chennai, within the next four weeks, whereupon the Commissioner will consider the matter in appropriate perspective and offer an opportunity of hearing to any representative, if felt necessary, before furnishing his speaking order within eight weeks of the receipt of the written representation,” the bench said.