Madras High Court
M.Gandhi vs The Commissioner on 7 March, 2025
Author: G.R.Swaminathan
Bench: G.R.Swaminathan
W.A.(MD)No.866 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 07.03.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
W.A(MD)No.866 of 2022
and
C.M.P(MD)No.7163 of 2022
M.Gandhi ... Appellant /
Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowments Board,
Chennai – 34.
2.The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowments Board,
Madurai – 625 001.
3.S.Ashok Kumar ... Respondents /
Respondents
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside
the order dated 14.03.2022 in W.P(MD)No.7905 of 2017.
For Appellant : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/03/2025 07:14:19 pm )
1/7
W.A.(MD)No.866 of 2022
For Respondents : Mr.K.S.Selvaganesan
Additional Government Pleader
for R.1 & R.2
Mr.S.Manohar for R.3
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by G.R.Swaminathan J.)
Heard both sides.
2.The case on hand pertains to the affairs of Shri Rajarajeswari
Thandumariamman Temple, Nethaji Road, Madurai. It was declared as
an excepted temple way back in the year 1933. A scheme for
administration was framed in O.A.No.7 of 1952 dated 02.03.1953 on the
file of the Deputy Commissioner, Thanjavur. Though the scheme
envisaged management of the temple by 7 hereditary trustees belonging
to 7 streets and 5 non hereditary trustees, in practice, the grandfather of
the writ petitioner Subramanya Gounder was exclusively managing the
temple. After his demise, the appellant's father Mahalinga Gounder was
functioning as the hereditary trustee. Mahalinga Gounder became sick
and handed over the charge to his brother Sarangapani Gounder.
Sarangapani Gounder died in the year 1985. After his demise, his son
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/03/2025 07:14:19 pm )
Vellankannu had taken over the administration of the temple. In the year
1999, the third respondent herein Thiru.S.Ashok Kumar, another son of
Sarangapani Gounder was recorded as the hereditary trustee by the
jurisdictional Joint Commissioner.
3.While so, the appellant herein M.Gandhi submitted
representation dated 12.07.2014 before the Joint Commissioner, HR&CE
Madurai demanding enquiry against Thiru.S.Ashok Kumar. The
appellant accused that S.Ashok Kumar was guilty of misappropriation
and mismanagement. The Joint Commissioner, HR&CE called for a
report from the Inspector who submitted his report on 04.08.2014.
Thereupon, the Joint Commissioner issued proceedings dated 18.07.2015
informing the appellant that he has to agitate his claim regarding
hereditary trustee issue only before the jurisdictional civil Court.
Aggrieved by the same, the appellant herein filed R.P.No.108 of 2016
before the Commissioner, HR&CE. The revision was dismissed on
13.09.2016. In the said order, a finding was given that the appellant's
right stood extinguished by virtue of Article 107 of the Limitation Act.
Challenging the said order, the appellant filed W.P(MD)No.7905 of 2017.
The writ petition was disposed of on 14.03.2022 in the following terms:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/03/2025 07:14:19 pm )
“46. Therefore, I am inclined to uphold the
impugned order dated 30.09.2016 of the first respondent
rejecting the application filed under Section 54 of H.R &
C.E Act by the petitioner to claim succession to the
office of Hereditary Trustee.
47. There is however no discussion in the
impugned order dated 30.09.2016 of the first respondent
regarding the grievances of the petitioner that there
were alleged malfeasance, misfeasance, mismanagement
and misappropriation by the third respondent. To that
extent, the impugned order dated 30.09.2016 of the first
respondent and the impugned dated 18.07.2015 of the
second respondent signed on 20.07.2015 are set-aside
and the case is remitted back to the second respondent
to take appropriate action on the complaint of the
petitioner regarding the alleged large scale
malfeasance, misfeasance, mismanagement and
misappropriation of funds by the third respondent based
on the report 04.08.2014 of the Inspector of H.R &C.E
Department.
48. The application of the petitioner alleging
malfeasance, misfeasance, mismanagement and
misappropriation by the third respondent, as the
Hereditary Trustee shall be examined by the second
respondent Joint Commissioner denovo and fresh order
shall be passed by the second respondent Joint
Commissioner within a period of three (3) months from
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/03/2025 07:14:19 pm )
the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Needless to
state, such order shall be passed after due notice to both
the petitioner and the third respondent.
49. While passing such order, the second
respondent is directed to consider the report 04.08.2014
of the Inspector of H.R. & C.E. Department and take
appropriate action under the provisions of the H.R.
&C.E. Act, 1959 if the third respondent is found guilty
of any misdemeanour.”
Challenging the same, this intra-Court appeal has been filed.
4.We uphold the contention of the learned counsel for the third
respondent that the hereditary trustee issue will have to be resolved only
before the jurisdictional civil Court. We are of the view that no definite
finding could have been rendered in this regard by the learned single
Judge. The Commissioner, HR&CE also could not have gone into the
issue of limitation and rendered any adverse finding against the
appellant. Those observations and findings made against the appellant
stand vacated. The appellant is given liberty to move the jurisdictional
civil Court. As and when the suit is filed, it shall be dealt with on its own
merits and in accordance with law. The appellant is also given liberty to
move the jurisdictional Joint Commissioner for modification of the
scheme that was framed in the year 1953.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/03/2025 07:14:19 pm )
5.This Writ Appeal is disposed of accordingly. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[G.R.S., J.] [M.J.R., J.]
07.03.2025
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
MGA
To
1.The Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowments Board,
Chennai – 34.
2.The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowments Board,
Madurai – 625 001.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/03/2025 07:14:19 pm )
G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J.
AND
M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.
MGA
07.03.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/03/2025 07:14:19 pm )
