W.A.No.1415 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN W.A.No.1415 of 2026 and C.M.P.No.13051 of 2026 Sri Venkatesa Perumal Temple Arakkattalai, No. 76, Radha Avenue Main Road, Valasaravakkam, Chennai – 600 087 Rep. by its Present President, G.Rajendran, President of above Arakkattalai Residing at No.16, Anbu Nagar, Valasaravakkam, Chennai – 600 087. Appellant Vs 1.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment (Admin) Department, Having office at Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 600 034. 2.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment (Admin) Department, Having office at Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 600 034. 3.The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment (Admin) Department, Having office at Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai - 600 034. _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1415 of 2026 4.The Fit Person/Executive Officer, Arulmight Sakthi Vinayagar Temple, K.K.Nagar, Chennai – 600 078. Respondents Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 29.04.2026 made in W.P.No.30166 of 2022. For Appellant: Mr.K.Karthikeyan For Respondents: Mr. V.Chandraprabu Government Advocate (HR& CE) for R1 to R3 Mr.Wilson Topaz for R4 JUDGMENT (Judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) This writ appeal, filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, challenges the order dated 29.04.2026 passed in W.P.No.30166 of 2022. 2.The appellant/writ petitioner had filed the writ petition challenging the notice dated 01.11.2022 of the 4th respondent/Temple. The writ petition was dismissed with the following direction: “3.In view of the same, this Writ Petition is dismissed by directing the petitioner to handover the charges to the fit person, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the handing over of the charges to the fit person, is subject to the out come of the appeal proceedings initiated by the petitioner. If the petitioner succeeds in _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1415 of 2026 the Appeal Suit, liberty is granted to him to make an application to restore his status. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.” 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the writ court overlooked the fact that the 4th respondent/Temple issued the notice in error, completely disregarding the pendency of the appeal suit. 4. Per contra, learned Government Advocate for the official respondents and learned counsel for the 4th respondent/Temple would submit that the learned Single Judge had rightly dismissed the writ petition, solely on the basis of the statement made by the writ petitioner, agreeing to hand over charge to the 4th respondent/Temple, however, subject to the outcome of the appeal proceedings initiated by the writ petitioner. 5. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions advanced on either side. 6. A perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge would reveal that the order passed therein merely records the undertaking and statement made on behalf of the writ petitioner to hand over the charge to the 4th respondent/Temple, subject to the outcome of _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1415 of 2026 the pending appeal proceedings. Since the impugned order does not constitute a "judgment" or a final adjudication on the merits of the statutory rights of the parties, no intra-court appeal lies against such a consent order under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. The appellant is bound by the statement recorded before the writ Court. Thus, liberty remains intact for the appellant/writ petitioner to pursue the statutory appeal suit and seek restoration of status in terms of the Single Judge's order, upon succeeding in those proceedings. 8. In the result, this Court finds no reasons to interfere with the order passed in the writ petition and consequently, the impugned order of the learned Single Judge is affirmed. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed as not maintainable. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, CJ.) (G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.) 13.07.2026 hvk _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1415 of 2026 To 1.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment (Admin) Department, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 600 034. 2.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment (Admin) Department, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 600 034. 3.The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment (Admin) Department, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai - 600 034. _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1415 of 2026 THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND G.ARUL MURUGAN,J. hvk W.A.No.1415 of 2026 13.07.2026 _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis