The district administration of Nilgiris, Coimbatore, Tirupur , Nagapatinnam, Salem and 11 other places within the Madras High Court jurisdiction districts have not yet given permission for the route march supposed to be held on October 22 . This is RSS’s pathsanchalan, or annual route march. The decision of the administration is in violation of Madras High Court orders. The denial of permission has sparked a legal battle and raised questions about the state government’s stance on the matter.
Background: Madras High Court’s Directive
On October 16, 2023, the Madras High Court issued a collective order instructing the Tamil Nadu police to grant permission for RSS route marches under reasonable conditions. Two days later, the Madurai bench of the Madras High Court granted permission for RSS route marches in 11 southern districts but denied permission for similar marches in Madurai, Sivaganga, and Ramanathapuram districts.
The High Court observed that the state government appeared to be intentionally opposing the RSS route march, stating, “The rejection order passed subsequently clearly shows that the State has no intention to permit this organisation to conduct the rally on October 22 or on October 29, 2023.” The court criticised the state’s rejection orders, noting that they were based on general reasons that would apply year-round rather than specific concerns about the event.
RSS’s Efforts to Secure Permission
R. Thiagarajan, representing the RSS, revealed that they initially approached the Nilgiris police on September 13 to seek permission for the RSS route march scheduled for October 22. The district superintendent of police in Nilgiris sent a set of questions regarding the proposed event on October 11. Despite providing responses to all the queries, their application was ultimately denied.
Court’s Observations
Justice G Jayachandran, in his detailed order, cited previous cases and orders issued by the Supreme and High Courts to support the RSS’s case. The court emphasised that the presence of religious structures like mosques and churches along the procession route should not be a reason to deny permission. It invoked Section 180-A of the District Municipalities Act 1920, which mandates that roads or streets should be accessible to people of all religions, castes, and creeds. Merely because one religious group is dominating in a particular locality, it cannot be a ground to prohibit celebrating religious festivals or taking processions of other religious groups through those roads. If it is to be accepted, then a day will come when a particular religious group, which is predominantly occupying the area, will not allow the people belonging to other religious groups to use the roads for movement, transportation, or normal access. Even marriage processions and funeral processions would be prohibited/ prevented, which is not good for our society.” The court argued that preventing religious processions based on the religious composition of an area would be detrimental to society and contrary to principles of secular and democratic governance.
RSS’s Appeal and DGP’s Response
After their initial attempts to secure permission, the RSS approached the Director General of Police on October 19, 2023, at 10:30 AM, seeking an appointment. Despite the scheduled appointment, the Director General of Police did not meet with the RSS representatives and instead requested copies of the court’s judgement and related documents. This prompted the RSS to take action.
Representaive of the RSS also pointed out “ it is your duty to comply with the directions issued in the judgement of Hon’ble High Court dated October 16, 2023, and even in spite of specific direction by the hon’ble High Court to grant permission at least three days prior to the date of rally you haven’t complied with or obeyed the judgement passed by the hon’ble court dated October 16, 2023. I therefore call upon you to obey and comply with the common order passed by the Hon’ble High Court in batch of Writ Petitions dated October 16, 2023, especially in W.P. No. 29732 of 2023, by granting permission for my client to conduct the route march on October 22. 2023 and the consequential public meeting immediately failing, which my client will be constrained to proceed with contempt proceeding at your cost”.
In response to the continued denial of permission, R. Thiagarajan issued a contempt notice to the Director General of Police, Home Secretary, and the concerned district Superintendents of Police, along with Inspectors and others. The notice emphasised the duty of the state to comply with the High Court’s directive and called upon the authorities to obey and comply with the court’s order.
Persistent Efforts and Legal Actions
Senior advocate Rabu Manohar, representing the RSS, revealed that they had applied for permission in 52 locations across Tamil Nadu to conduct RSS route marches.
After hearing our petitions and arguments, the high court directed police to give permission 5 days before the march and rejected all the reasons for denying permission. It also directed to provide the necessary security. Senior advocate Rabu Manohar further said, “When approached the DGP, he initially did not give appointment. But due to our persistent efforts, he asked us to come. We provided the applications and necessary documents seeking permission. He asked us to leave to his PA. But he did not take any action till Saturday (the first phase of March is scheduled for today) instead of giving permission, the state government approached SC with an appeal. On verifying the SC registry, we found only two appeals were filed—one for the Madras High Court and the other for the Madurai bench of the Madras High Court. In all the places, they have not filed appeal. We decided to file contempt applications barring the two places for which TN filed an appeal in SC. We issued contempt of court notice to the DGP, Home secretary, and concerned district SPs, inspectors, and others. We will file a contempt application in Madras High Court on October 30. TN DMK government has been consistently denying permission to route march. The court also asked the public prosecutor: did you want them to go to SC every year to get permission for the simple route rally? In the earlier SC order, it was directed to give permission to RSS march. DMK government has the audacity to not permit the RSS route march due to its strong ideological aversion to it. We will see the officials punished for their wilful disobedience”.
They contacted the DGP and Superintendents of Police (SPs) in the relevant districts, submitting their applications in mid-September. However, their applications were left unaddressed for 20 days.
Following hearings in the High Court, the authorities were directed to grant permission five days before the scheduled marches and to provide necessary security. The RSS persisted in its efforts to secure permission and contacted the DGP, who initially did not grant an appointment. Eventually, an appointment was given, and the RSS representatives submitted their applications and documents.
Instead of granting permission, the Tamil Nadu state government filed an appeal in the Supreme Court, challenging the High Court’s decision. It is worth noting that the appeal only covered two locations, leaving the RSS’s applications for the other locations untouched.
The ongoing dispute surrounding the denial of permission for RSS route marches in Tamil Nadu has now escalated with the issuance of a contempt notice to top officials. The Madras High Court’s directives have emphasised the importance of allowing religious processions to proceed without discrimination, and the RSS has taken legal action to enforce these directives.
As this legal battle continues, it raises questions about the state government’s stance and the broader implications for the freedom of religious processions and gatherings. The contempt proceedings scheduled for October 30 will be closely watched as they could result in consequences for officials accused of willful disobedience of court orders.
