Madras High Court
C.Rajamani Gurukal vs The Commissioner on 1 April, 2025
Author: G.R.Swaminathan
Bench: G.R.Swaminathan
W.A.(MD)No.906 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 01.04.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
W.A.(MD)No.906 of 2022
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.7570 of 2022
C.Rajamani Gurukal ... Appellant
Vs.
1.The Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Board,
Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai.
2.The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Board,
Ramnad District.
3.The Trustee,
Arulmighu Mangalanathaswamy Temple,
Thiru Uthiragosamangai,
Ramnad District.
4.Sri Bageeratha Gurukal (Died)
5.B.Mangaleswara Gurukkal @ Raju
6.B.Bala Subramaniya Gurukkal @ Viji
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/04/2025 03:56:09 pm )
W.A.(MD)No.906 of 2022
7.B.Siva Subramaniya Gurukkal @ Mathan ... Respondents
(R5 to 7 / legal heirs of the deceased 4 th
respondent are impleaded vide order dated
28.02.2025 in C.M.P.(MD)No.12456 of 2022
in W.A.(MD)No.906 of 2022)
Prayer : Writ Appeal filed under Clause XV of Letters Patent, to allow
the writ appeal by setting aside the order dated 29.06.2022 passed in
W.P.(MD).No.17951 of 2017 on the file of this Court.
For Appellant : Mr.Velayutham Pichaiya
For Respondents : Mr.K.S.Selvaganesan,
Addl. Government Pleader for R1 & R2.
Mr.S.Ramesh for R3.
Mr.H.Laxmi Shankar for R5 to R7.
JUDGMENT
Heard both sides.
2.Vide proceedings dated 16.04.2012, the trustee of Arulmighu
Mangalanathaswamy Temple, Thiru Uthiragosamangai, Ramanathapuram
District permitted Devendra Gurukal and Bageeratha Gurukal to perform
pooja from the mid-day (uchikalam) on 18th of every English month and
on 19th and 20th. This was objected by Rajamani Gurukal and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/04/2025 03:56:09 pm )
Mangaleswara Gurukal. As a result, the proceedings dated 16.04.2012
was rescinded on 07.05.2012. When Bageeratha Gurukal raised
objections, the proceeding dated 16.04.2012 was restored on 06.08.2012.
Challenging the proceedings dated 06.08.2012, Mangaleswara Gurukal
filed O.S.No.102 of 2022 before the District Munsif Court,
Ramanathapuram. The suit was dismissed on 07.07.2017. He filed
A.S.No.34 of 2017 on the file of the Sub Court, Ramanathapuram. It was
also dismissed on 21.06.2019. The civil Courts held that suit
proceedings could not have been initiated and that Mangaleswara
Gurukal ought to have availed appeal remedy under the statute (Tamil
Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959). After
dismissal of the suit, Soma Kurugal, Chandrasekara Gurukal and
Mangaleswara Gurukal filed A.P.No.1 of 2017 before the Joint
Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments
Department, Sivagangai. The appeal is still pending. Interim stay was
granted in the said appeal. In the meanwhile, the hereditary trustee of the
temple issue proceedings dated 10.08.2017 carving out the share of
Bageeratha Gurukal alone. Bageeratha Gurukal was allowed to perform
pooja for 1/4th day starting from night of 19th of every English month.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/04/2025 03:56:09 pm )
Challenging the same, Rajamani Gurukal filed W.P.(MD)No.17951 of
2017. The learned Single Judge vide order dated 29.06.2022 dismissed
the writ petition. Questioning the same, this writ appeal has been filed.
3.The learned counsel for the appellant raised very many
contentions. He pointed out that the share of Rajamani Gurukal was
already sold way back in the year 1967 through a registered sale deed
dated 22.02.1967.
4.We are of the view that the proceeding impugned in
W.P.(MD)No.17951 of 2017 is only a continuation of the earlier
proceeding dated 16.04.2012. Therefore, the proceeding impugned in the
writ petition ought to be considered as rather consequential in nature.
Since against the primary proceeding, an appeal had already been filed
before the appellate authority, it would only be just and proper that
Rajamani Gurukal also joins the fray before the appellate authority.
5.The learned counsel for the appellant submits that since adverse
findings have been given in the writ petition, even if they were to avail
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/04/2025 03:56:09 pm )
the appeal remedy, it would be rather infructuous in nature. We find
force in this contention. We, therefore vacate all the adverse findings
rendered by the learned Single Judge in his order dated 29.06.2022. In
other words, the appeal before the appellate authority will be conducted
on a clean slate. We grant liberty to the appellant to get himself
impleaded in A.P.No.1 of 2017. We direct the Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Sivagangai to
dispose of A.P.No.1 of 2017 on merits and in accordance with law within
a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6.With the aforesaid liberty to the appellant and with the aforesaid
observations, this writ appeal is disposed of. No costs. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(G.R.S. J.,) & (M.J.R. J.,)
01.04.2025
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
ias
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/04/2025 03:56:09 pm )
To:-
1.The Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Board,
Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai.
2.The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Board,
Ramnad District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/04/2025 03:56:09 pm )
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
and
M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.
ias
01.04.2025
(1/2)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/04/2025 03:56:09 pm )
