JUDGMENT (Prayer: Writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 27.11.2020 in WP No.16653 of 2020.) Sanjay V. Gangapurwala, CJ. Heard Mr.M.R.Thangavel, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan, learned Additional Government Pleader, for the respondents. 2. The appellant assails the order of learned Single Judge dated 27.11.2020 in WP No.16653 of 2020, thereby dismissing the writ petition. 3. In the writ petition, appellant/petitioner had prayed for the following relief: “Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents, their men, agents and officials from interfering with the legal activities of the petitioner club including playing of 13 cards game like Rummy with stakes whatever and also from harassing the members guests or the members of the management of the petitioner club in any manner and for other incidental relief.” 4. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition. 5. We do not find any error on the part of learned Single Judge in dismissing the writ petition, in view of the prayer made therein. The appellant wanted its activity of game like rummy to be played with stakes. The same was rightly negatived. 6. A Division Bench of this Court in Director General of Police, State of Tamil Nadu, Chennai, vs. Mahalakshmi Cultural Association rep.by its Secretary, (WA No.2287 of 2011), under its judgment dated 22.03.2012, has observed thus: “24. On the basis of the above discussions, we arrive at the following conclusions:- (1) The game of rummy (13 cards) is only a game of skill even though an element of chance is also involved. (2) In the event rummy is played by the members or the guests without stakes, the provisions of the Chennai City Police Act are not attracted. (3) In the event rummy is played by the members or the guests with stakes, the provisions of the Chennai City Police Act are attracted. (4) In the event the club/association either allows its members or guests to play rummy with stakes or make any profit or gain out of such gambling, the Police has the authority to invoke the provisions of the Chennai City Police Act. (5) In order to ascertain as to whether the premises is used as a gaming house for gambling, the Police is entitled to invoke Section 23 of the Act. 25. (5) In order to ascertain as to whether the premises is used as a gaming house for gambling, the Police is entitled to invoke Section 23 of the Act. 25. In view of the above, we modify the order of the learned single Judge and dispose of the writ appeal with the following directions: (1) The respondent-Association shall not indulge in any activity by allowing its members or the guests to play rummy (13 cards) with stakes and make profit or gain. (2) The Police are entitled to take action in the event any illegal activity is carried on in the association premises. (3) In respect of the FIR registered by the Police against those 56 persons and others who were said to have indulged in illegal gambling activity as per the raid conducted on 10.08.2011, it is open to the Police to proceed further as per law and it is for the Association, its members and their guests to defend the same in the manner known to law, as the criminal action was initiated after a valid raid conducted on 10.08.2011 by the Police. (4) The Police shall not disturb the respondent-Association frequently under the guise of inspection without there being any reliable information as to the illegal activities of the association or its members or the guests.” 7. Our attention was also drawn to the judgment of another Division Bench of this Court in WA No.296/2013 dated 06.10.2017, (The Director General of Police, Chennai vs. S.Dillibabu), for a similar ratio. 8. In light of that, the appellant cannot be permitted to indulge in activity by allowing its members or guests to play rummy (13 cards), with stakes. 9. In the event rummy is played by the member or guests of the appellant without stakes, then the provisions of the Chennai City Police Act would not be attracted. 10. With this observation, the writ appeal is disposed of. There will be no order as to costs.