Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 17666 Mad
Judgement Date : 5 September, 2024
W.A(MD)No.1483 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 05.09.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI
W.A(MD)No.1483 of 2024
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.11523 of 2024
S.Murugan ... Appellant / Petitioner
-vs-
1.The Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowment Department,
Chennai-34.
2.The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowment Department,
Mayiladuthurai,
Mayiladuthurai District.
3.The Assistant Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowment Department,
Kumbakonam,
Thanjavur District.
4.The Assistant Commissioner /
Executive Officer,
Sri Naganatha Swamy Temple,
Thirunagaeshwaram,
Thanjavur District. ... Respondents / Respondents
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 1 of 4
W.A(MD)No.1483 of 2024
PRAYER: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside the
order dated 12.03.2024 passed in W.P.(MD)No.18521 of 2023.
For Appellant : Mr.G.Gomathi Sankar
For R-1 to R-3 : Mr.S.P.Maharajan,
Special Government Pleader
For R-4 : Mr.V.Chandra Sekar
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.]
Challenge before the Writ Court was a notice under Section 9 of the
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, which is
essentially consequential upon an order of eviction passed under Section
78. It is not disputed that an eviction order was passed under Section 78 of
the said Act against the petitioner and the same has not been questioned.
The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the property in
its possession is in a different survey Number and the eviction order has
been passed in respect of different survey numbers. Those questions
cannot be decided under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in the
absence of any evidence. It was open to the petitioner to raise such a
contention in the 78 proceedings and if the contentions have been so
raised, they would have been dealt with by the authority. Even if those
____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
contentions have not been dealt with by the authority, the remedy for the
petitioner lies before the revisional authority, namely, the Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, under Section
21 of the Act.
2. Hence, we see no merit in the writ appeal. The appeal is therefore
dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. There
shall be no order as to costs.
[R.S.M., J.] [L.V.G., J.]
05.09.2024
NCC :Yes/No
Index :Yes/No
Internet: Yes
Sml
To
1.The Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Chennai-34.
2.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Mayiladuthurai, Mayiladuthurai District.
3.The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District.
____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
and L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
Sml
05.09.2024
____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!