Madras High Court
Arulmighu Pandimuneeswarar Thirukoil vs The Commissioner on 6 June, 2016
Author: M.Venugopal
Bench: M.Venugopal
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 06.06.2016 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL W.P(MD)No.9887 of 2016 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.9811 and 9812 of 2016 Arulmighu Pandimuneeswarar Thirukoil Parambarai Maruthuvar Sangam, represented by its Secretary, T.Kumaresan. ..Petitioner Vs 1.The Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Chennai. 2.The Deputy Commissioner/ Executive Officer/Fit Person, Arulmighu Pandimuneeswarar Thirukoil, Melamadai, Madurai-20. ..Respondents. Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the impugned notification in Na.Ka.No.13 of 2016/A2, dated 13.05.2016 issued by the second respondent and to quash the same insofar as item NO.2 is concerned. !For Petitioner :Mr.G.R.Swaminathan for M/s.Thilaga Balasubramaniam For Respondent-1 :Mr.VR.Shanmuganathan Spl.Govt.Pleader For Respondent-2 :Mr.S.Manohar Spl.Govt.Pleader :ORDER
Heard both sides.
2.By consent of both sides, the main Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal.
3.According to the Petitioner/Sangam, Arulmighu Pandimuneeswarar Thirukkoil is in existence for more than 100 years being worshipped by large number of devotees hailing from different communities. The devotees come to the temple campus and as a part of ''Vendhuthal'', they have their hair tonsured. The tonsuring is done by barbers, who belong to three families namely (1) Irulappadass family (2) Palani Family and (3) Pitchaikaran Family. Presently, there are about 50 families who are the branches of these three families.
4.The stand of the Petitioner is that devotees offer a token fee and also leave their tonsured hair to be collected by the barbers. The Secretary of the Petitioner/Sangam hail from the family of Irulapadass and to present a unified stand of the members, who are carrying on tonsuring service in the Petitioner/Temple, formed the Petitioner/Sangam and registered the same.
5.The grievance of the Petitioner is that the impugned notification, dated 13.5.2016 issued by the second respondent stating that auction in regard to the right to collect the tonsured hairs is proposed to be held on 16.6.2016 and inasmuch as the practice of the devotees to have their head tonsured within the temple campus. Furthermore, it has never been the custom for the temple management to claim the tonsured air, the Petitioner/Sangam prays for quashing of the impugned notification in issue.
6.It is to be borne in mind that Section 63 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act,1959(hereinafter called as the ?Act?)relates to the resolution of disputes specified therein by the Joint or Deputy commissioner. Indeed, in terms of the ingredients of Section 63 of the Act, the Deputy Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Board has been given the exclusive jurisdiction to determine whether an institution is a religious institution. Also, as per Section 63(e) of the Act, where any person is entitled by customs or otherwise to to any honour, emolument or perquisite in any religious institution and what the established usage of a religious institution is in regard to any other matter can be determined by the Deputy Commissioner of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department in the considered view of this Court.
7.As far as the present case is concerned, it comes to be known that the Petitioner/Sangam has taken a crystalline stand that the tonsuring of hair(belonging to the devotees) is done by barbers, who belong to three families(1)Irulappadass Family(2)Palani Family and (3) Pitchakaran Family and at present there are about 50 families, who are the branches of three families etc. The Petitioner/Sangam in the Writ Petition at para No.3 has also specifically averred that the place where tonsuring takes place was put up by the Petitioner/Sangam at a cost of Rs.5 lakhs two years ago and by the impugned notification, dated 13.5.2016, published in Tamil Daily(Thinathanthi), the settled rights of the Petitioner are very much affected.
8.Inasmuch as Section 63 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 is a in-built Act which deals with resolution of disputes specified therein either by the Joint Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner and in view of the fact that in regard to the tonsuring of hair by the barbers who belong to three families in question and when it is the clear-cut case of the Petitioner/Sangam that the impugned notification, dated 13.5.2016 of the second respondent/The Deputy Commissioner, Arulmighu Pandimuneeswarar Temple, Melamadai, Madurai 20 affects the rights of barbers in question, this Court is of the considered view that the Petitioner/Sangam, in the interest of justice, Equity, Fair Play and as per Section 63 of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act only to seek remedy before the Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Madurai and in this regard, the Petitioner/Sangam is directed to file appropriate petition seeking necessary remedy and also interim applications seeking interim reliefs, within a period of three days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is open to the Petitioner/Sangam, to raise all factual and legal pleas before the Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Madurai, who in turn shall take into consideration of the same and to dispose of the said petition on merits(of course after providing necessary opportunity to the Petitioner/Sangam and others concerned, if any by adhering to the principles of natural justice). It cannot be gainsaid that the Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department is to pass a reasoned and speaking order on merits adhering to the factual and legal pleas to be projected by the Petitioner/Sangam and the Joint Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department is to decide the subject matter with a clear, open, unbiased mind and in a dispassionate manner.
9.With the aforesaid observations and directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
No costs.
To
1.The Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Chennai.
2.The Deputy Commissioner/ Executive Officer/Fit Person, Arulmighu Pandimuneeswarar Thirukoil, Melamadai, Madurai-20.
.