Madras High Court
S.Periyasamy vs The Commissioner on 6 June, 2025
Author: G.R.Swaminathan
Bench: G.R.Swaminathan
W.A.(MD)No.1211 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 06.06.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR
W.A.(MD)No.1211 of 2024
S.Periyasamy ... Appellant
Vs.
1.The Commissioner,
H.R & C.E Department,
Tirunelveli.
2.The Joint Commissioner,
H.R & C.E Department,
Tirunelveli.
3.S.Esakki Pandian
4.Nivek
5.M.Savarivasan ... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Appeal filed under Clause XV of Letters Patent, to allow
the writ appeal by setting aside the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.2837 of
2024 dated 12-02-2024 on the file of this Court.
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/06/2025 07:00:08 pm )
W.A.(MD)No.1211 of 2024
For Appellant : Mr.S.Meenakshi Sundaram, Senior Counsel,
For Mr.T.Selvan
For Respondents : Mr.P.Subbaraj,
Spl. Government Pleader for R1 & R2.
Ms.C.Geetha for R4 & R5.
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned senior counsel for the appellant, the learned
Special Government Pleader for the department and the learned counsel
for the contesting private respondents.
2.The case on hand pertains to the management of Arulmigu
Pasunkili Ayyan Sastha Temple, Gopalasamudram, Tirunelveli District.
The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment
Department, Tirunelveli vide proceedings dated 05.01.2024 appointed
the respondents 3 to 5 as non-hereditary trustees for the said temple.
Challenging the same, the appellant filed W.P.(MD)No.2937 of 2024.
The learned Single Judge recorded a finding that the appointment is in
terms of the scheme framed in O.A.No.1 of 1999 and declined to
entertain the writ petition. Questioning the same, this writ appeal came
to be filed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/06/2025 07:00:08 pm )
3.It is not in dispute that O.A.No.1 of 1999 filed in Section 64(1)
of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act, 1959, a scheme
of administration was framed on 20.06.2006 by the Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Tirunelveli.
Clause 4 of the scheme reads as follows:-
“This temple and their properties shall be administered by
the non-hereditary trustees not less than three and not more than
five selected from the community of Patharai Panku Thevanars
living in Gopalasamudram Village subject to the qualification
mentioned under Section 26 of the Act 22/59”
4.The learned Single Judge extracted the aforesaid clause and
came to the conclusion that since the trustees appointed by the Joint
Commissioner were selected from the said community, interference is not
warranted.
5.The learned Single Judge may not have been fully right. As
rightly pointed by the learned senior counsel for the temple, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/06/2025 07:00:08 pm )
succeeding paragraph was not taken note of by the learned Single Judge.
Clause 4 is as follows:-
“Such selection shall be made by the said community
members at its general body meeting and the list of selected
persons shall be sent to the competent authority to place the same
before the District Committee or Tamil Nadu Temple
Administrative Board as the case may be for its approval and the
said District Committee, Temple Administrative Board will
appoint the trustees under Section 49 of the Act subject to the
qualifications mentioned under Section 26 of the Act 22/59.”
A mere reading of the aforesaid clause indicates that a general body
meeting of the community must be convened and in that meeting, three to
five persons must be selected and the select list should be sent to the
competent authority, who will ultimately make the appointment.
6.In this case, such a general body meeting was not convened at
all. Therefore, the impugned proceedings of the Joint Commissioner
cannot be said to be in accord with the scheme set out in O.A.No.1 of
1999 dated 20.06.2006. But we are not inclined to set aside the
impugned proceedings for the simple reason that 1 ½ years have elapsed
and the trustees have hardly six more months of tenure left.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/06/2025 07:00:08 pm )
7.However, the illegality that had taken place cannot be allowed to
be perpetuated. We therefore direct the Joint Commissioner, Hindu
Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Tirunelveli to
forthwith notify the constitution of the general body. The Joint
Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department,
Tiruenlveli will associate his immediate sub-ordinate in this task. Within
a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment, the composition of the general body as envisaged by the
scheme shall be finalized. Thereafter, the Joint Commissioner, Hindu
Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Tirunelveli will
convene the general body meeting for selecting the trustees. Once the
said selection is over, then the appointment has to be made in terms of
Clauses 4 and 5 of the scheme. The entire exercise shall be completed
within a period of two months. Once the process is completed, the
trustees selected under the impugned proceedings will have to
immediately vacate their office.
8.We are of the view that the scheme framed on 20.06.2006 in
O.A.No.1 of 1999 does not appear to be comprehensive. We note that
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/06/2025 07:00:08 pm )
there are quite a few gaps. We, therefore, call upon the second
respondent to suo motu have a re-look at the scheme.
8.This writ appeal is disposed of accordingly. No costs.
(G.R.S. J.,) & (K.R.S. J.,)
06.06.2025
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
ias
Issue order copy on 10.06.2025.
To:
1.The Commissioner,
H.R & C.E Department,
Tirunelveli.
2.The Joint Commissioner,
H.R & C.E Department,
Tirunelveli.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/06/2025 07:00:08 pm )
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/06/2025 07:00:08 pm )
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
and
K.RAJASEKAR, J.
ias
06.06.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/06/2025 07:00:08 pm )
