Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 89437 (MAD)

C.MATHESWARAN v. THE COMMISSIONER

WP/33715/2025 · 2025-09-08

M Dhandapani

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

W.P.No.33715 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 08.09.2025 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. DHANDAPANI W.P.No.33715 of 2025 and W.M.P.No.37825 of 2025 C.Matheswaran ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. 2.The Joint Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Thiruvannamalai. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order of the 2nd respondent dated 08.07.2025 in M.P.No.28/2024/A2, date: 08.07.2025 and quash the same as illegal and unlawful and consequently direct the respondents to register the petitioner as one of the hereditary trustees of the Arulmigu Saakkiyamman Temple, Moranahalli Chaparthi Village, Krishnagiri District and Taluk. Page No.1 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.33715 of 2025 For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vasavi Sridevi For Respondents : Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan Special Government Pleader ***** ORDER This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order of the 2nd respondent dated 08.07.2025 in M.P.No.28/2024/A2, date: 08.07.2025 and quash the same as illegal and unlawful and consequently direct the respondents to register the petitioner as one of the hereditary trustees of the Arulmigu Saakkiyamman Temple, Moranahalli Chaparthi Village, Krishnagiri District and Taluk. 2. Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan, learned Special Government Pleader, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. In view of the consent expressed by the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. 3. The case of the petitioner is that Arulmigu Sakkiyamman Temple located in Moranahalli Village, Krishnagiri District and Taluk, Page No.2 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.33715 of 2025 which is a non-listed temple declared u/s 49(i) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 (in short 'the HR & CE Act'). The petitioner's father, namely Late Chinnay Gounder @ Jollappan was one of the five persons declared as Hereditary Trustees of the said temple u/s 63(b) of the HR & CE Act. After his demise, the petitioner has been managing the temple affairs as hereditary trustee by way of succession. Thereafter, he filed a petition u/s 54(1) of the HR & CE Act seeking to register himself as the Hereditary Trustee and the same was rejected by the 2nd respondent vide impugned order dated 08.07.2025 stating that the petitioner is disqualified u/s 26(1-A)(a) of the HR & CE Act based on the admission that he was cultivating temple lands. Challenging the same, the petitioner has filed this writ petition before this Court. 4. Though very many grounds have been raised in this writ petition, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, as against the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent, there is an effective appeal remedy available before the 1st respondent u/s 54(4) of the HR & CE Act. Hence, he prays that, this Court may grant the above liberty to the petitioner. Page No.3 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.33715 of 2025 5. In view of the above submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Court, without interfering with the impugned order, grants liberty to the petitioner to approach the 1st respondent for appropriate remedy in the manner known to law, if the limitation period has not expired, within a period of four(4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If any appeal is filed by the petitioner within the stipulated time, the 1st respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight (8) weeks thereafter, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and aggrieved persons, if any. 6. With the above liberty, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 08.09.2025 Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No sp Page No.4 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.33715 of 2025 To 1.The Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. 2.The Joint Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Thiruvannamalai. Page No.5 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.33715 of 2025 M.DHANDAPANI, J. sp W.P.No.33715 of 2025 08.09.2025 Page No.6 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis