W.P.(MD)No.2217 of 2025 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 11.08.2025 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.P.(MD)No.2217 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.1589, 1590, 1592 and 15600 of 2025 Sarubala Thondaiman ... Petitioner -vs- 1.The Commissioner, H.R. and C.E., Nungambakkam, Chennai. 2.The Joint Commissioner, H.R. and C.E., Chennai. 3.The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Suganda Kunthalambigai Sametha Mathurbothaswamy Kovil, Malaikottai, Trichy. 4.The Tahsildar, Tiruchirappalli West Taluk, Tiruchirappalli. 5.The Commissioner, Trichy Corporation, Trichy. ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.2217 of 2025 6.The Assistant Director, Local Planning Authority (LPA), Tiruchirappalli. 7.K.Rajamanickam ... Respondents Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the first respondent made in Omu.No.187047/2024/R3 dated 19.03.2024 and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Poornachandran For R1, R2, R4 & R6: Mr.SS.Madhavan Additional Government Pleader For R3 : Mr.VR.Shanmuganathan Standing Counsel For R5 : No Appearance For R7 : Mr.S.Deenadhalayan ORDER The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the impugned proceedings of the first respondent / Commissioner dated 19.03.2024, bearing Reference No.O.Mu.No.187047/2024/R3, whereby the lease of the property dedicated by the late Mrs.Durai Rani Ammal during her lifetime, vide Dedication / Settlement Deed dated 06.05.1962, has been called into question. ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.2217 of 2025 2. The third respondent has floated a tender on 22.04.2023 for auctioning the rights in respect of the said land, which was dedicated by the founder, late Mrs.Durai Rani Ammal. 3. The petitioner claims to be a descendant of the family of the late Mrs.Durai Rani Ammal. It is submitted that the land in question, having been dedicated under the Dedication / Settlement Deed dated 06.05.1962, cannot be leased or diverted by the temple for any purpose other than that for which it was originally dedicated. 4. In support of this submission, the learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention to certain paragraphs from the said deed, which read as under:- '';.... ehd; cs;s tiuapy; i\ nrhj;Jf;fis mDgtpj;Jf; nfhz;L te;J vdf;F gpw;fhyk; ,e;j Trust Deed gj;jpug;gb i\ Njt];jhd epH;thf mjpfhup mtu;fs; ];thjPdk; nra;J nfhs;s Ntz;baJ ,e;j Trust Dedication gj;jpuk; jQ;ir ,e;J kj mwepiya ghJfhg;Gj;Jiw Jiz Mizau; mtu;fsJ mq;fPfhuj;Jf;Fl;gl;lJ mbapw; fz;l nrhj;jpd; tUk; gbiaf; nfhz;L nra;JtuNtz;baJ. ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.2217 of 2025 ,jdbay; fz;l nrhj;Jf;fis ,U> xj;jp fpiuak; Kjyhd ve;j guhjPdKk; nra;a Njt];jhdj;jhUf;F mjpfhuk; ,y;iy. vd; Mas; fhyk; gupae;jk; 1 mapl;lj;jpy; fz;l jz;zPu; njhl;bf;F tUlh tUlk; Mb khjk; ehngUk; ehrJu;j;jp jpjpf;F i\ Nfhtpy; ahidia mDg;gp tu Ntz;baJ. ehd; ghj G+iI nra;tjw;F xt;nthU nts;spf;fpoikAk; vd; gq;fshtpw;F i\ Nfhtpy;ahidia mDg;gp itf;f Ntz;baJ i\ Nfhtpy; ahidf;F mrt; Vu;g;gl;lhYk; Njt];jhdj;jpw;F Kf;fpa NjitapUe;jhYk; mf;fhyq;fspy; ahidia mDg;g Ntz;bajpy;iy.'' 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that, although the lease has been granted for a period of five years by a lease deed dated 01.01.2024 (covering the period from 26.03.2024 to 25.03.2029), the seventh respondent is in the process of constructing a permanent structure on the land. This, according to the petitioner, indicates that the intention of the third respondent is to permanently lease the land to the seventh respondent, which would be in violation of the Dedication Deed dated 06.05.1962, as well as the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. 6. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel for the third respondent ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.2217 of 2025 submits that the clause referred to in the Dedication Deed only prohibits simple mortgage, usufructuary mortgage, and sale of the property. It is further submitted that the family of the founder has no existing rights over the property, and hence, the petitioner has no locus standi to question the decision of the third respondent / Executive Officer of the Arulmigu Suganda Kunthalambigai Sametha Mathurbothaswamy Temple, to which the land was dedicated. 7. The learned counsel for the seventh respondent also submits that there is no proposal to construct any permanent structure. It is stated that only a temporary shed has been erected and that the lease is for a limited duration, specifically from 26.03.2024 to 25.03.2029. 8. I have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. 9. A reading of the relevant clauses of the Dedication Deed dated 06.05.1962 indicates that, although the petitioner may be a member of the family of the founder, late Mrs.Durai Rani Ammal (from the royal family of Pudukottai ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.2217 of 2025 Samasthanam), there is no continuing right or interest that would confer locus standi upon the petitioner to challenge the lease arrangement. The restrictive clauses in the Dedication Deed are confined to prohibiting sale, simple mortgage, and usufructuary mortgage. 10. On the contrary, the public auction notice issued by the third respondent was for renting the property on a monthly rental basis of Rs.2,15,000/-. Pursuant to the same, the permission to enter upon the land was granted to the seventh respondent from 14.12.2023. Further, the annual rent amounting to Rs.25,80,000/- has been paid in advance. 11. Therefore, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned proceedings of the first respondent approving the lease arrangement. The land in question, though dedicated under the Dedication Deed dated 06.05.1962, is also not required for the performance of ceremonies beyond those observed during the lifetime of the founder. The purpose of renting out the property is clearly to generate income for the temple to fulfill its obligations under the Trust Deed. ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.2217 of 2025 12. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed and accordingly, it is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. NCC : Yes / No 11.08.2025 Index : Yes / No smn2 To:- 1.The Commissioner, H.R. and C.E., Nungambakkam, Chennai. 2.The Joint Commissioner, H.R. and C.E., Chennai. 3.The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Suganda Kunthalambigai Sametha Mathurbothaswamy Kovil, Malaikottai, Trichy. 4.The Tahsildar, Tiruchirappalli West Taluk, Tiruchirappalli. 5.The Commissioner, Trichy Corporation, Trichy. 6.The Assistant Director, ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.2217 of 2025 Local Planning Authority (LPA), Tiruchirappalli. ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.2217 of 2025 C.SARAVANAN , J. smn2 W .P.(MD)No.2217 of 2025 11.08.2025 ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis