High Court · 2025

W.P.No.36692 of 2024IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 13.03.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHYW.P.No.36692 of 2024and W.M.P.Nos.39594 of 20241.I.VELU2.M.ARUMUGAM3.S.RAMACHANDIRAN ... PetitionersVs1.THE COMMISSIONER,HINDU RELIGIOUS & CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS ADMIN DEPARTMENT, NO. 119, UTHAMAR GANDHI SALAI, NUNGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI - 600 034.2.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,HINDU RELIGIOUS & CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS ADMIN DEPARTMENT, PERAMBALUR DIVISION, NEAR MADHANAGOPALASWAMY TEMPLE, PERAMBALUR - 621 212. 3.THE FIT PERSON,A/M.MARIAMMAN TEMPLE, COLONY STREET, CHINNAVENMANI COLONY, PERIYAVENMANI POST, KUNNAM TALUK, PERAMBALUR DISTRICT.ALSO, THE REGIONAL CIRCLE INSPECTOR, KUNNAM DIVISION (GRADE-1), HINDU RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, 1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.36692 of 2024NEAR TAHSILDAR OFFICE, KUNNAM NAGAR AND TALUK, PERAMBALUR DITRICT. 4.A.KARUPPAN5.K.ARIVAZHAGAN6.M.MOOKAN7.M.SENGON8.C.SWAMY DURAI9.A.BALASUBRAMANIAN10.M.PARAMASIVAM11.M.BRUNTHA12.B.CHINNAMMAL13.P.POONKA14.R.GEETHA15.C.MANIKAM16.M.SAKTHIVEL,17.K.AZHAGAN18.V.DURAISAMY19.S.RAMASUBBU(R4 to R19 WERE IMPLEADEDBY AN ORDER DATED 13.03.2025 INW.M.P.NO. 736 OF 2025 IN W.P.NO. 36692 OF 2024 BY DBCJ) ... RespondentsPrayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for entire records pertaining to order dated 22.11.2024 of the second respondent made in Se.MU.Na.Ka.No. 2374/2023/A8 and the consequential notice dated 25.11.2024 of the third respondent and quash the same.For Petitioner : Mr.V.SrikanthFor R1 to R3 : Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan Special Government PleaderFor R4 to R19 : Mr.S.Ananth2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.36692 of 2024 ORDERThis writ petition is filed challenging the impugned order dated 22.11.2024 made in Se.MU.Na.Ka.No. 2374/2023/A8 and the consequential notice dated 25.11.2024 in and by which a fit person has been appointed to administer the Arulmigu Mariamman Temple in Colony Street, Chinnavenmani Colony, Periyavenmani Post, Kunnam Taluk, Perambalur District.2. The case of the petitioners is that the entire village is divided into nky;ghjp. fPH;ghjp and eLghjp, and the affairs of the temple have been conducted in an amicable manner. However, the impleaded fourth respondent encroached upon a common pathway and when all the villagers questioned the same, he filed an earlier writ petition as if there was a dispute among the sections of people and an order is passed, pursuant to which the fit person is appointed. 3. According to the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that, an application for the framing of a scheme is already pending before the Joint Commissioner in Tiruchirappalli. Therefore, without framing 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.36692 of 2024the scheme and appointing the trustees, the fit person was appointed based on the erroneous representation of the fourth respondent. There is no dispute among the villagers regarding the administration of the temple.4. Per contra, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 would submit that the fourth respondent had earlier filed a writ petition in W.P.No. 17478 of 2024, in which this Court recorded the dispute between the village people in paragraph No. 5 and directed the appointment of a fit person in paragraph No. 6. Accordingly, the fit person was appointed. With reference to the application filed for the framing of a scheme and appointment of trustees, the same will be considered as per the process of law.5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the fourth respondent would submit that the entire village is divided into nky;ghjp. fPH;ghjp and the nky;ghjp people are not permitting the fPH;ghjp people to even enter the temple and worship there. The dispute arose in this context. An order was passed by this Court in the earlier proceedings and the fit person was appointed accordingly. The same need not be interfered with by this Court. The allegation that the petitioners encroached upon the common pathway is false, according to the 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.36692 of 2024fourth respondent.6. I have considered the rival submissions made on either side and perused the material records of the case.7. When the fit person has been appointed pursuant to a direction of this Court in W.P.No.17478 of 2024, no exception whatsoever can be taken to the appointment of the fit person. The only contention of the petitioners is that they were not a party to the earlier writ petition and that the facts were not correctly placed before the Court. In any event, even before this Court, an apparent dispute is pleaded. Therefore, pending the resolution of the dispute, there is nothing wrong in appointing a fit person. As far as the claim of the petitioners to administer the temple is concerned, an application has already been filed for the framing of a scheme. 8. The petitioners are ultimately claiming to be members of the existing Dharmakarthas families and are requesting to be appointed as trustees. That application can only be considered in accordance with the law, ignoring the right claimed on behalf of the caste, but considering them as devotees and sons of the Dharmakartha temple. It is needless to mention that while framing the 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.36692 of 2024scheme, caste can never be the determining factor. The only two factors which should determine while framing the scheme is only mwr; rpe;jid and Md;kpfr; rpe;jif and definitely not $hjp rpe;jid/ The authority shall keep this in mind while framing the scheme. The application pending before the Joint Commissioner shall be disposed of as expeditiously as possible, in any event, not later than twelve weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order without waiting for the certified copy of the order. 9. With reference to the allegation that the fourth respondent has encroached upon any common pathway or poromboke land, the second respondent, Assistant Commissioner and the Tahsildar, Kunnam Taluk shall conduct a joint survey in the presence of the fourth respondent as well as the petitioners. If there is any encroachment is found and if it is a temple land, the proceeding shall be taken as per Section 78 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. If it is the Government Poramboku land, an appropriate action under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 shall be taken by the Tahsildar.6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.36692 of 202410. With the above directions and observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs. 13.03.20251/2Neutral Citation: Yes/NonslTo1.THE COMMISSIONER,HINDU RELIGIOUS & CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS ADMIN DEPARTMENT, NO. 119, UTHAMAR GANDHI SALAI, NUNGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI - 600 034.2.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,HINDU RELIGIOUS & CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS ADMIN DEPARTMENT, PERAMBALUR DIVISION, NEAR MADHANAGOPALASWAMY TEMPLE, PERAMBALUR - 621 212. 3.THE FIT PERSON,A/M.MARIAMMAN TEMPLE, COLONY STREET, CHINNAVENMANI COLONY, PERIYAVENMANI POST, KUNNAM TALUK, PERAMBALUR DISTRICT.ALSO, THE REGIONAL CIRCLE INSPECTOR, KUNNAM DIVISION (GRADE-1), HINDU RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, NEAR TAHSILDAR OFFICE, 7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.36692 of 2024KUNNAM NAGAR AND TALUK, PERAMBALUR DITRICT. D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.nslW.P.No.36692 of 202413.03.20251/28/8