Madras High Court
K.Ramesh vs The Commissioner on 14 July, 2023
W.P.(MD)No.5811 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 14.07.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY
W.P.(MD)No.5811 of 2023
and
W.M.P.(MD)No.5381 of 2023
K.Ramesh ... Petitioner
vs.
1.The Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment
Department,
No.19, Uthamar Gandhi Salai,
Thousand Lights West,
Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034.
2.The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment
Department,
Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/12
W.P.(MD)No.5811 of 2023
3.The Assistant Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment
Department,
Virudhunagar Division,
Virudhunagar District.
4.The Executive Officer,
A /m.Venkatachalapathy Temple,
Sathur, Virudhunagar District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the
records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in
R.P.No. 43 of 2020/D2, dated 31.01.2023, confirming the order of the 2 nd
respondent in R.P.No. 1/2009/E1, dated 14.11.2019 and to quash the
same as illegal and consequentially, to direct the respondents not to
interfere with the day today affairs, administration of the petition temple
viz., A/M. Mariamman Temple, Sattur, Virudhunagar District,
administered by the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Karthikeya Venkatachalapathy
For Respondents : Mr.S.P.Maharajan
Special Government Pleader
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2/12
W.P.(MD)No.5811 of 2023
ORDER
This writ petition is filed for writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to
quash the impugned order dated 31.01.2023 passed by the 1st respondent
in R.P.No.43 of 2020/D2, confirming the order of the 2nd respondent in
R.P.No. 1/2009/E1, dated 14.11.2019 as illegal and consequentially to
direct the respondents not to interfere with the day today affairs of the
administration of the petition temple viz., A/M. Mariamman Temple,
Sattur, Virudhunagar District, administered by the petitioner.
2. The petitioner is a member of Nadar community. The temple is
situated in Sathur, Virdhunagar District, which is dedicated to the
worship of Goddesses Badrakali Amman, Mariamman and Lord Shiva.
During the pre-independence era, the Nadar community called as Sanars
were depressed, suppressed and denied entry in any religious institutions.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.5811 of 2023
Therefore, they decided to construct their own communal temple in the
year 1949. The petitioner's community had purchased the land and put
up the construction. Since there was interference by the HR&CE
Department, the community people had filed O.S.No.88 of 2005 on the
file of Sub Court, Sivakasi inter alia praying to declare the temple as
denominational community temple and the same was dismissed.
Aggrieved over the dismissal of the above said suit, the plaintiffs therein
had preferred appeal in A.S.No.16 of 2008 on the file of District Court,
Srivilliputtur. The appellate Court has set aside the judgment and decree
passed in O.S.No.88 of 2005 and declared the temple as denominational
community temple and directed the appellants to approach the HR and
CE Department authority to get a certificate of communal denomination
temple. But the appellants failed to approach the authorities since they
were under the impression that the declaration granted in A.S.No.16 of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.5811 of 2023
2008 is sufficient.
3. Inspite of the declaration in the said judgment, the respondents
initiated proceeding to appoint a fit person. Again, another round of
litigation was started in R.P.No.1 of 2009. After hearing the plea of the
temple, the respondent dismissed the petition. Aggrieved over, the temple
preferred a review application in R.P.No.43 of 2020 before the 1 st
respondent. The 1st respondent has passed the impugned order stating
that even though in the A.S.No.16 of 2008, it has been declared as
denominational community temple and directed the plaintiffs to approach
the authority with appropriate application for seeking the status of
denominational community temple, since the plaintiffs had not
approached the authorities, the respondents have proceeded as if it had
not been declared as community temple and proceeded to appoint a fit
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.5811 of 2023
person. Aggrieved over the same, the present writ petition is filed.
4. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents sought time to file a counter affidavit. This writ petition was
filed in March, 2023 but the respondents have not chosen to file the
counter affidavit, inspite of notice. It is seen that the respondents have
filed counter affidavit in the review application and the same shall be
treated as counter filed in this writ petition. The said counter affidavit is
sufficient to decide the issue before this Court. Moreover, the stand of
the respondents is evident from the impugned order and the respondents
cannot travel beyond the impugned order. Therefore, this Court is
rejecting the plea of the learned Special Government Pleader seeking
time to file counter affidavit.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.5811 of 2023
5. The respondents have admitted that the judgment and decree
passed in A.S.No.16 of 2008 is in favour of the petitioner temple wherein
it has been clearly declared that the appellants' temple is a
denominational community temple. However, a consequential direction
was issued wherein it is stated that the appellants shall approach the
appropriate authority for getting the certificate of denominational temple,
but that has not been complied by the petitioner. Since the petitioners
have not approached the authorities for the certificate, since as on date
there is no certificate, the respondents have come to the conclusion that it
is not denomination temple. Even if the contention of the respondents is
accepted, the other part of the judgment which has declared the temple as
denomination temple would be staring at the respondents. Not
approaching the respondents for the certificate, at the most can be termed
as procedural irregularity. Therefore, the plea of the respondents ought to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.5811 of 2023
be rejected.
6. Since in the other part of the judgment it has been clearly
declared that it is a denomination temple, then the respondents would not
have any jurisdiction to interfere in the temple. Though there is a delay in
approaching the respondents for the said certificate, it will not confer
jurisdiction on the respondents to administer the denomination temple.
More so the respondents are not having power to appoint a fit person.
Therefore, the appointment of fit person is illegal and beyond the
jurisdiction of the respondents.
7. When it was brought to the knowledge of the respondents in the
impugned proceeding about the judgment and decree, the respondents
rather than appointing the fit person ought to have implemented the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.5811 of 2023
judgment and decree and granted the certificate of denomination temple.
8. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the
respondents have exceeded their jurisdiction and without respecting the
judgment and decree rendered by the jurisdictional Appellate Court has
passed the impugned order. Therefore, this Court is quashing the
impugned order.
9. This Court is of the considered opinion that when the Civil
Court has declared the temple as denomination temple, a separate
certificate by the HR and CE Department is not necessary. The
respondents shall treat the said temple as a denomination temple.
Consequently, this Court is forbearing the respondents in interfering with
the administration of the temple.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.5811 of 2023
10. With the above said observation, the writ petition is allowed.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Index : Yes / No 14.07.2023
Internet : Yes
NCC : Yes / No
Tmg
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.5811 of 2023
To
1.The Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment
Department,
No.19, Uthamar Gandhi Salai,
Thousand Lights West,
Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034.
2.The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment
Department,
Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.
3.The Assistant Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment
Department,
Virudhunagar Division,
Virudhunagar District.
4.The Executive Officer,
A /m.Venkatachalapathy Temple,
Sathur, Virudhunagar District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.5811 of 2023
.
S.SRIMATHY, J
Tmg
W.P.(MD)No.5811 of 2023
14.07.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
