Madras High Court
D.Jeevanathan vs The Joint Commissioner on 9 January, 2024
Author: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
Bench: Sanjay V.Gangapurwala, D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
W.A.No.53 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09.01.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
W.A.No.53 of 2024
D.Jeevanathan .. Appellant
Vs.
1.The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Villupuram.
2.The Assistant Commissioner/Executive Officer,
Arulmighu Angalamman Thirukoil,
Melmalayanur,
Villupuram District.
3.The Assistant Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Villupuram District.
4.The Inspector,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Gingee, Villupuram District.
5.Vijaya Samundeeswari
Page 1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.53 of 2024
6.Santhanam,
Chairman Board of Trustees,
Arulmighu Angalamman Thirukoil,
Melmalaiyanur Village,
Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District.
7.Senthilkumar
Trustee,
Arulmighu Angalamman Thirukoil,
Melmalaiyanur Village,
Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District.
8.Devaraj,
Trustee,
Arulmighu Angalamman Thirukoil,
Melmalaiyanur Village,
Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District.
9.Ramalingam,
Trustee,
Arulmighu Angalamman Thirukoil,
Melmalaiyanur Village,
Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District.
10.Selvam,
Trustee,
Arulmighu Angalamman Thirukoil,
Melmalaiyanur Village,
Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District.
11.Saravanan,
Trustee,
Arulmighu Angalamman Thirukoil,
Melmalaiyanur Village,
Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District.
12.Vadivel,
Trustee,
Page 2 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.53 of 2024
Arulmighu Angalamman Thirukoil,
Melmalaiyanur Village,
Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District.
13.D.Annamalai Poosari
14.P.Selvaraj Poosari
15.S.Chandran Poosari
16.D.Poongavanam
17.D.Raja Poosari
18.Sivakumar Poosari
19.R.Elumalai Poosari
20.Ramesh Poosari
21.Ganesan Poosari
22.Selvam Poosari
23.Mani Poosari
24.Sekar Poosari .. Respondents
Prayer : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against
the order of the learned Single Judge dated 12.10.2023 passed in
W.P.No.29371 of 2023.
For the Appellant : Mr.V.Raghavachari
Senior Counsel
for Mr.J.Chandran Sundar
For the Respondents : Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan
Spl. G.P. (HR & CE)
for respondents 1 to 4
: Mr.V.Umashankar
for respondent No.5
JUDGMENT
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
(Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
We have heard Mr.V.Raghavachari, learned Senior Counsel for
Mr.J.Chandran Sundar, learned counsel for the appellant;
Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan, learned Special Government Pleader (HR &
CE) for respondents 1 to 4; and, Mr.C.Umashankar, learned counsel
for respondent No.5.
2. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant submits that the
scheme was changed without hearing the appellant. None of the
members of the community were heard while modifying the scheme.
Under the modified scheme, the married women are being given the
voting right. The same was not permitted under the original scheme.
In case of Trust, the question of applicability of Article 14 of the
Constitution of India or otherwise would not arise. Learned Senior
Counsel further submits that, as there was a flagrant violation of
principles of natural justice, the writ petition was filed challenging the
order modifying the scheme. In such cases, this Court may exercise
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3. The learned Single Judge has observed that even if the
remedy of appeal is barred, that would not preclude the
Commissioner to exercise the powers of suo motu revision conferred
under Section 69(2) of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment
Act, 1959 (for short, “the Act of 1959”) and, in view of that, disposed
of the writ petition.
4. Naturally, the Commissioner is empowered to look into the
grievances as raised by the appellant. The appellant may approach
the Commissioner under Section 69(2) of the Act of 1959 within three
days from today. In case the appellant approaches the Commissioner
under Section 69(2) of the Act of 1959, the Commissioner shall
consider the said grievance.
5. It is submitted that the elections are fixed on 24.1.2024.
The appellant may file an application for interim orders as may be
permissible under law before the Commissioner. The Commissioner,
who would be exercising his power under Section 69(2) of the Act of
1959, shall pass orders upon the application filed by the appellant for
interim orders, preferably on or before 22.1.2024. The parties to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
this present appeal can also appear before the Commissioner.
6. With these observations, the writ appeal is disposed of.
There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, C.M.P.No.331 of
2024 is closed.
(S.V.G., CJ.) (D.B.C., J.)
09.01.2024
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
bbr
To
1.The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Villupuram.
2.The Assistant Commissioner/Executive Officer,
Arulmighu Angalamman Thirukoil,
Melmalayanur, Villupuram District.
3.The Assistant Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Villupuram District.
4.The Inspector,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Gingee, Villupuram District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
bbr
09.01.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
