Kulanthaiyappan alias Kulanthailingam v. The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR and CE) Department
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
In view thereof, this writ petition is disposed of in the following terms:-i
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Upon hearing the learned counsel on either side, it can be seen that, in the earlier suit, the decree of permanent injunction restraining interference with the petitioner's poojariship was granted only as against defendants 1 and 2, who were private individuals. No order was…
Judgment
W.P(MD)No.15157 of 2026BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 08.06.2026 CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHYW.P(MD)No.15157 of 2026 Kulanthaiyappan alias Kulanthailingam... PetitionerVs.
The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR and CE) Department, Thanjavur.
The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR and CE) Department, Pudukkottai.
The Executive Officer, Devasthanam Office, Thirukokarnam, Pudukkottai District....RespondentsPrayer: Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 3rd Respondent to appoint the petitioner as the Poosari of Arulmigu Sri Malaiya Marungar Ayyanar Temple and Sri Urumanathar Temple situated at Perungalur, Pudukkottai District, while providing necessary security to perform the daily poojas without illegal interference base on 1 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.15157 of 2026the petitioners representation dated 27.12.2025 and pass such further or other orders as this Honble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of this case and thus render justice. For Petitioner : Mr.K.G.Arun KumarFor R1 and R2: Mr.R.Parthiban Government Standing CounselFor R3: Mr.G.MathavanORDERThe writ petition is filed for a mandamus directing the 3rd respondent to appoint the petitioner as the Poosari of Arulmigu Sri Malaiya Marungar Ayyanar Temple and Sri Urumanathar Temple situated at Perungalur, Pudukkottai District, while providing necessary security to perform the daily poojas without illegal interference base on the petitioners representation dated 27.12.2025.2. The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the petitioner's ancestors, his father, and thereafter the petitioner himself, have been exercising the customary right to perform poojas in the aforesaid temple. As a matter of fact, when a dispute arose 2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.15157 of 2026earlier, the petitioner filed a civil suit in O.S. No. 8 of 2005, and a decree was passed in his favour on 03.03.2017 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Pudukottai. In these circumstances, the petitioner contends that he has suddenly been prevented from performing poojas in the temple, while third parties are being permitted to act as poojaris.
Operative part
Upon hearing the learned counsel on either side, it can be seen that, in the earlier suit, the decree of permanent injunction restraining interference with the petitioner's poojariship was granted only as against defendants 1 and 2, who were private individuals. No order was passed against the temple or the authorities of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department. Therefore, when the petitioner claims a right to act as a poojari by virtue of a customary right, it is open to him to file an application under Section 63(e) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. Upon such application being filed, it is for the 1st respondent to consider the same and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law.3 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.15157 of 20265. In view thereof, this writ petition is disposed of in the following terms:-i.The petitioner shall file an application under Section 63(e) of the Tamil Nadu HR & CE Act, 1959 before the 1st respondent within a period of one week from the date of receipt or other web copy of the order.ii. The same shall be dealt with as expeditiously as possible and final orders be passed after hearing all the necessary parties within a period of 18 weeks from the date of filing of the said application.iii. The petitioner shall also array the temple concerned as the respondent in this application and also such other parties who are interested in opposing this application.iv. No costs. 08.06.2026Neutral Citation: Norgm4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.15157 of 2026To1. The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR and CE) Department, Thanjavur. 2. The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR and CE) Department, Pudukkottai.3. The Executive Officer, Devasthanam Office, Thirukokarnam, Pudukkottai District.5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.15157 of 2026D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY , J. rgmW.P(MD)No.15157 of 202608.06.20266
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In view thereof, this writ petition is disposed of in the following terms:-i
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 — s. 63(e).
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.