The Madras High Court today said it expected that CISF may be deployed in its Madurai Bench by the end of this month.
The First Bench, comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice R Mahadevan, while considering a suo motu PIL on deployment of CISF security in the Madurai bench, said, “It is expected that CISF will be deployed in Madurai bench by the end of this month.”
Security of the Madras High Court complex was taken over by CISF personnel from the state police on November 16 last year after lawyers created a ruckus while agitating for declaration of Tamil as official language of the court and over contempt of court proceedings against two Madurai-based Bar association leaders.
The High Court wanted the CISF cover in its Madruai bench also.
The bench posted the matter for further hearing to July 21.
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High court today described the Rameswaram Island and temple as a great tourist and pilgrim site and stressed the need for keeping them clean and tourist-friendly.
A division bench of Justice R.Sudhakar and Justice V.M.Velumani directed the Municipal Commissioner to implement the recommendations of the Advocate Commissioner for improving the amenities and conditions in the island.
The recommendations included renovating Agnitheertham (sea near the temple), cleaning it four times a day, better illumination and keeping the four ‘car streets’ litter-free, mobile bio-toilets, among other things.
The bench said the Municipal Commissioner should have voluntarily implemented the recommendations instead of the court directing it to do so.
The suggestions also included providing shelter for mentally-challenged persons, taking steps to get sanction of funds under Clean India project and also to enrol the island as one of the beneficiaries under AMRUT scheme under the auspices of the Urban Devleopment Ministry.
The bench said the Supreme Court was also focussing on keeping places of importance clean and the island administration should not get any adverse comment from the apex court.
It asked the Municipal Commissioner to prepare a standard operation procedure for implementing the recommendations and submit a report on October 26. They also directed the Joint Commissioner of the temple to be present on that date with regard to implementation of suggestions made for improving amenities inside the shrine.
Top B-town actors alongwith top officials of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) were issued notice by the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Courton Wednesday for participating in an alleged obscene stage performance at the inaugural of Indian Premier League (IPL)-V in Chennai on April 3, seeking registration of a criminal case against them .
Justice A. Selvam passed the order in the petition filed by a Madurai lawyer K. Jebakumar (32), through his counsel W. Peter Ramesh Kumar, and adjourned the hearing to July 31. The people to whom notices had been ordered included BCCI president N. Srinivasan, IPL governing council chairman Rajiv Shukla, American pop singer Katy Perry, Australian cricketer Douglas Erwin Bollinger and actress Priyanka Chopra, Amitabh Bachchan.
The lawyer filed a similar petition immediately after the inaugural function and it was disposed of by Mr. Justice Selvam on April 20 with a direction to the Director-General of Police to take appropriate action. Claiming that the court direction was not implemented, he filed the present petition, seeking a positive direction to the police to register a case on the basis of a complaint lodged by him.
According to the petitioner, the police were turning a blind eye to “cultural vandalism in the name of western celebrative practices”during occasions such as the IPL inaugural, though the High Court on many occasions disapproved of the practice of organising even dance dramas during village temple festivals on the ground of obscenity.
He alleged the performance on the YMCA grounds in Teynampet on the day of the IPL inaugural would attract the provisions of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act 1986, Young Persons (Harmful Publications) Act 1956 and other such legislation. “The live display on stage was uncensored, indecent, denigrating men and women, obscene and lascivious and appealing to prurient interest,”he added.