Madras High Court Asks TN Govt To Share Draft SOP For Political Meetings With TVK, AIADMK, Desiya Makkal Sakthi Katchi Parties

The Madras High Court, on Friday, directed the Tamil Nadu government to share the draft Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to be followed when granting permissions for political parties to conduct public meetings.

The bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G Arul Murugan directed the state to share the SOP with the political parties that are part of the ongoing litigation in connection with the SOP, ie, the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK), All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK), and Desiya Makkal Sakthi Katchi (DMSK).  

In the previous hearing, the court had extended the time granted to the State government to formulate the draft SOP, after Additional Advocate General J Ravindran informed the court that the draft SOP was ready and suggestions from other political parties were being awaited. When the matter was taken up today, Ravindran informed the court that the draft SOP had been filed in accordance with the court's instructions. 

Senior Advocate NL Rajah, appearing for TVK, pointed out that the party had not been served with a copy of the draft SOP. To this, Ravindran submitted that it was not possible to circulate the copy with all political parties, as it would lead to a never-ending process. He, however, assured the court that the draft SOP was framed after taking into consideration the suggestions of the political parties.

"There are 20 recognised and 40 registered parties. Suppose I share with one party, I should share with the other parties also. If one party agrees to one, one may disagree. There will be more confusion. Their suggestions have been taken while framing the SOP. If I start the process of giving them a copy, it will be a never-ending process. If anyone is aggrieved by these regulations they can always challenge," Ravindran submitted.

Rajah argued that the SOP had put more obligations on the political parties and very few obligations on the State government. He pointed out that the SOP was silent on the time by which the police officer had to decide an application requesting permission for a roadshow. He also pointed out that while the collector was given the power to designate a place for the roadshow, the procedure to be followed was not clearly provided. He stated that the SOP was silent on whether the political parties would be heard before designating an area.

Rajah also submitted that the SOP had excluded temple festivals, but it was possible that such tragedies (similar to that of Karur incident) may happen during a temple festival also. 

"In the SOP, they have excluded temple festivals. But temple festivals may also cause these tragedies. I'm only trying to ensure that the prospect of challenge is reduced as much as possible. It should be looked as a public interest litigation to streamline the process towards a better regulatory regime," Rajah submitted. 

Rajah thus called for a transparent system wherein the State uploads the draft policies on a website and considers the objections/recommendations by various parties involved. 

Rajah also submitted that the party was affected by the direction of the State Government, rejecting their permission for the roadshow and asking them to give the application four weeks in advance. He argued that this was a condition in the draft SOP, and it could not be made applicable to the party before implementing it. 

"I'm aggrieved by their direction that application for meeting has to be filed 4 weeks before intended that. That is part of SOP which has not come into effect. If it is being applied to me before coming into affect, it is not proper. Let the SOP come into effect and then let them implement it. Implementing parts of the SOP before it comes into effect is not proper," Rajah said.

To this, Ravindran said that the party's request for permission was rejected since there were law and order problems. He informed the court that the party had sought permission for 4th December, which was celebrated as Karthigai Deepam in Tamil Nadu, and on December 6th, which was the date on which Babri Masjid was demolished. He thus argued that political meeting on these two days may cause law and order problems and the party could choose any other dates for its meetings. 

The court, after hearing the parties, directed the State to share a copy of the draft SOP with the parties to the case and adjourned the hearing by a week for taking a final call.

Case Title: A Thirukumaran and Another v. The State of Tamil Nadu (connected cases)

Case no: WP (MD) 28971 of 2025