✦ High Court of India · 26 Aug 2025

High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 26 Aug 2025

Court

High Court of India

Decided

26 Aug 2025

Bench

N. SATHISH KUMAR

Length

1,242 words

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act 1959

W.P.Nos.21587 & 22936 of 2023IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 26.08.2025CORAM :THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMARW.P.Nos.21587 & 22936 of 2023andW.M.P.Nos.20962, 20963, 22433, 22434 & 22437 of 2023W.P.No.21587 of 2023 :1.K.Devaraj2.B.Dinesh ... PetitionersVs.1.The District Collector, Office of the Collectorate, Tirupur District.2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of Superintendent of Police, Tirupur District.3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Department, Tharapuram Taluk, Tirupur District.4.The Tahsildar, Tharapuram Taluk, Tirupur District.Page 1 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.21587 & 22936 of 20235.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments, Tirupur District.6.The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments, Tirupur District.7.The Executive Officer/Thakkar, Arulmigu Angalamman Thirukovil, Puthupai Village, Tharapuram Taluk, Tirupur District.8.Palani Sathish 9.P.A.Jaganathan10.P.Mohan11.S.Vishwanathan12.M.Sivalingam13.G.Ashok Kumar14.C.Sakthi Kumar15.Pon.Dhandapani ... RespondentsPrayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the impugned order No.Na.Ka.Enn.2615/2023/Ee passed by the 3rd respondent dated 09.05.2023 and to quash the same and consequently to Page 2 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.21587 & 22936 of 2023direct the 3rd respondent to consider the representation presented by the petitioners dated 28.06.2023 for maintaining peace in the 7th respondent Temple, i.e., Arulmigu Angalaamman Thirukovil.For Petitioners: Mr.M.RajasekharFor R1 to R4:Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan, Additional Public ProsecutorFor R5 to R7:Mr.K.KarthikeyanGovernment Advocate (HR & CE)For R8 to R15:Mr.T.S.VijayaraghavanW.P.No.22936 of 2023 :1.D.Selvaraj2.S.Viswanathan3.Palani Sathish 4.R.Jagadish5.J.Arvind Kumar ... PetitionersVs.1.The District Collector, Tirupur District.2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tirupur District.3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dharapuram Taluk, Tirupur District.Page 3 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.21587 & 22936 of 20234.The Tahsildar, Dharapuram Taluk, Tirupur District.5.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Department, Tirupur District.6.The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Department, Tirupur District.7.The Fit Person, Arulmigu Angalamman Thirukovil, Puduppai Village, Dharapuram Taluk, Tirupur District.8.R.Muthuswamy9.M.Ramesh10.R.Ananthan11.K.Ganesh12.K.Devaraj13.B.Dinesh14.P.Manigandan15.S.Karthik16.S.Saravanakumar ... RespondentsPrayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 09.05.2023 made in Na.Ka.No.2615/2023/Ee so far as it stays the usage of the Annadhana Mandapam inside Arulmigu Angalamman Temple, Puduppai Village, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District, and quash the same and further direct the 7th respondent to permit usage of the Annadhana Mandapam by the Page 4 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.21587 & 22936 of 2023community members of “Thenkurichinatu Kovamsapandaram”, “Thenkarainadu Kongu Navithargal” and “Surya Kula Viswakarma Community” on 07.08.2023 and 08.08.2023. For Petitioners: Mr.T.S.Vijaya RaghavanFor R1 to R4:Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan, Additional Public ProsecutorFor R5 to R7:Mr.K.KarthikeyanGovernment Advocate (HR & CE)For R8 to R16:Mr.M.RajasekharC O M M O N O R D E RThese writ petitions have been filed challenging the order of the 3rd respondent dated 09.05.2023, ordering that the Temple Mandapams of Arulmigu Angalamman Temple, Puduppai Village, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District, which is under the control of the HR & CE Department, shall not be used by both the rival groups named as 'A' and 'B' parties in the impugned order for public functions, till a decision is taken in the dispute pending between the two groups before the Joint Commissioner of HR & CE Department.Page 5 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.21587 & 22936 of 20232.Brief background of the case is as follows :There are two groups of different communities named as 'A' and 'B' parties in the impugned order, trying to establish their rights over the temple namely Arulmigu Angalamman Temple, Puduppai Village, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District, which is admittedly under the control of the HR & CE Department. During festive season, a sudden chaos ensued due to the enmity between the parties while conducting a festival, and therefore, a peace meeting was convened on 09.02.2023. Both the groups claim right over the Temple Management and Temple Mandapams and the dispute is pending before the Joint Commissioner of HR & CE Department in O.A.No.2 of 2023 under Section 64(1) of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, for framing a scheme for administration of the Temple. The members of 'A' party claim that their community members have constructed the Mandapam. After peace meeting, it was resolved that the Temple Mandapams shall not be used by any of the parties for any public functions. Accordingly, in order to avoid any further law and order Page 6 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.21587 & 22936 of 2023issues, the 3rd respondent has passed the impugned order restraining both the groups from using the Temple Mandapams for public functions. It is also indicated in the order that, if both the parties require the Mandapam for private functions on a same date and time, the Mandapam shall be allotted to the party which bids the highest rate. Such being the position, when the parties wanted to conduct an Annadham outside the Temple, they faced some practical difficulties without the Mandapams and therefore, they have come forward challenging the impugned order of the 3rd respondent.3.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials on record.4.Admittedly, the Temple is now under the control of HR & CE Department and a Fit Person is also appointed. As both the parties are fighting for their rights over the Temple and its Mandapams and an application under Section 64(1) of HR & CE Act is also pending before the Joint Commissioner of HR & CE Department for framing a Scheme, this Court directs that such application be decided within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after giving Page 7 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.21587 & 22936 of 2023opportunity to both the parties. Since the Mandapams belong to the Temple, which is admittedly under the control of the HR & CE Department and a Fit Person is also appointed and also taking into consideration the facts and circumstances, it is made clear that, if any party requires the Mandapam for their public or private functions, it is for the Fit Person to decide and allot the Mandapam to them after collecting the necessary fees fixed by the Temple authorities. The Fit Person shall ensure that both the rival parties do not conduct any festival on the same day and time. If both the parties require the Mandapam on a same day and time and do not arrive at a consensus and still want to create law and order issue, the Fit Person shall not allot the Mandapam to any of the parties till their rights are crystallized legally in the dispute pending before the Joint Commissioner of HR & CE Department. It is also open to the Temple authorities to rent the Mandapams to other common public at the usual rates fixed by them. 5.With these directions, both the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.26.08.2025Page 8 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.21587 & 22936 of 2023mknInternet: Yes Index : Yes / NoSpeaking order : Yes / NoNeutral Citation : Yes / NoTo1.The District Collector, Office of the Collectorate, Tirupur District.2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of Superintendent of Police, Tirupur District.3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Department, Tharapuram Taluk, Tirupur District.4.The Tahsildar, Tharapuram Taluk, Tirupur District.5.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments, Tirupur District.6.The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments, Tirupur District.Page 9 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.21587 & 22936 of 20237.The Executive Officer/Thakkar, Arulmigu Angalamman Thirukovil, Puthupai Village, Tharapuram Taluk, Tirupur District.8.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.Page 10 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.21587 & 22936 of 2023N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.mknW.P.Nos.21587 & 22936 of 2023Page 11 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.21587 & 22936 of 202326.08.2025Page 12 of 12

Find similar cases Start drafting free

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments

More cases under Constitution of India