Madras High Court
S.A.Rajendran Poosari vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 30 April, 2021
Author: M.Govindaraj
Bench: M.Govindaraj
WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018
10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 30.04.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ
WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018, 10676 OF 2019
AND 19107 OF 2014
AND CONNECTED MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS
WP (MD) NO.10328 / 2018
1.S.A.Rajendran Poosari
2.R.Soundarrajan Poosari
3.S.Marimuthu
4.R.Maharajan Poosari
5.M.Navarathinam
Hereditary Trustees
Arulmighu Mariamman Thirukoil
Irukkankudi, Virudhunagar District. ... Petitioners
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by its Secretary to Government
Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Dept.,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Commissioner
Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Dept.,
Nungambakkam High Road,
Chennai.
3.The Joint Commissioner
Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Dept.,
1/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018
10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014
Sivagangai.
4.The Assistant Commissioner / Executive Officer
Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Dept.,
Arulmighu Mariamman Thirukoil
Irukkankudi, Virudhunagar District.
5.S.Ramar Poosari S/o.Sangaiah Poosari
6.S.Ramar Poosari S/o.Sankaralingam Poosari
7.R.Hariram
8.Kathiresan Poosari
9.S.R.M.Ramamurthi Poosari
(RR5 to R9 are impleaded vide order dated
25.07.2018 in WMP (MD) Nos.12045, 12902,
12903 & 14099 of 2018)
10.S.S.Murugan @ Sakarai Poosari
S/o.Late Subbiah Poosari
(R10 impleaded vide order dated 24.10.2019
in WMP (MD) No.12956/2018 in WP (MD)
No.10328/2018) ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the
respondents herein to hold elections to the posts of Chairman, Board of
Trustees, for Arulmighu Mariamman Thirukovil, Irukkankudi,
Virudhunagar District within the time frame fixed by this Court.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Shanmugasundaram
Senior Counsel
for Mr.S.D.Ramalingam
2/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018
10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014
For Respondents : Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan
1 to 4 Special Government Pleader
For Respondent-5 : Mr.S.Muthalraj
For Respondents : Mr.G.Narayanasamy
6&7
For Respondent-8 : Mr.M.V.Venkataseshan
For Respondent-9 : Mr.N.Dilipkumar
For Respondent-10 : Mr.S.Silambanan
Senior Counsel
for Mr.M.Kannan
WP (MD) NO.7676 / 2018
S.Kathiresan Poosari ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.Government of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by its Principal Secretary
Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments
(RE-3-1) Department
Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Commissioner
Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment Board
Nungambakkam High Road,
Chennai.
3.The Joint Commissioner
Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Board
Sivagangai,
Sivagangai District.
4.The Executive Officer / Assistant Commissioner
3/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018
10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014
Arulmighu Irrukangudi Mariamman Temple
Irrukangudi Post, Sattur Taluk,
Virudhunagar District.
5.S.R.M.Ramamurthy
6.S.A.Rajendran Poosari
7.R.Soundarrajan Poosari
8.S.Marimuthu
9.R.Maharajan Poosari
10.M.Navarathinam
(RR6 to R10 are impleaded vide order dated
24.10.2019 in WMP (MD) Nos.18768/2019 ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call
for the records relating to the impugned order in Letter No.
14425/RE-3-1/2016-5, dated 21.03.2018 passed by the 1st respondent,
quash the same and further directing the 1st respondent to take action
against the 5th respondent Hereditary Trustee under Section 53(2) of the
HR & CE Act forthwith.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.V.Venkataseshan
For Respondents : Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan
1 to 3 Special Government Pleader
For Respondent-4 : Mr.P.Mahendran
For Respondents : Mr.R.Shanmugasundaram
4/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018
10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014
6 to 10 Senior Counsel
for Mr.S.D.Ramalingam
WP (MD) NO.10676 / 2019
R.Soundarrajan Poosari ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Joint Commissioner
Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Department
Sivagangai,
2.The Assistant Commissioner / Executive Officer
Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Department
Arulmighu Mariamman Thirukovil
Irukkankudi, Virudhunagar District.
3.S.Kathiresan
4.S.Ramar ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd
respondent herein be suitably directed to take necessary action against the
respondents 3 and 4 herein for holding two posts based on the
recommendation made by the 1st respondent in his proceedings dated
16.04.2019 and also to recover the monetary benefits received by the
respondents 3 and 4 herein within the time limit.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Shanmugasundaram
Senior Counsel
for Mr.S.D.Ramalingam
5/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018
10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014
For Respondent-1 : Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan
Special Government Pleader
For Respondent-2 : Mr.P.Mahendran
For Respondents 3&4: Mr.M.V.Venkataseshan
WP (MD) NO.19107 / 2014
1.S.S.Murugan @ Sarkarai Poosari (died)
2.Ramachandran
(P2 substituted as LR of the deceased P1 vide
order dated 24.10.2019 made in WMP (MD)
No.8093/2019 in WP(MD) No.19107/2014) ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Commissioner
Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments
Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 34.
2.The Joint Commissioner
Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments
Sivagangai.
3.M.Navarathinam
4.S.Ramar Poosari
5.S.Kathiresan Poosari
6.R.Hariram Poosari
7.S.Ramar Poosari
(RR4 to R7 impleaded vide order dated
25.07.2018 in WMP (MD) No.12589/2017) ... Respondents
6/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018
10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call
for the records of the second respondent in S.M.Na.Ka.No.7047/2014/A1
quash the order dated 31.10.2014 and direct the 2nd respondent to record
the name of the petitioner as Hereditary Trustee of Arulmigu Mariamman
Temple, Irukkangudi in the vacancy caused by the death of R.Marimuthu
Poosari.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Silambanan
Senior Counsel for Mr.M.Kannan
For Respondents : Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan
1&2 Special Government Pleader
For Respondent-3 : Mr.R.Shanmugasundaram
Senior Counsel
for Mr.S.D.Ramalingam
For Respondents : Mr.Muthalraj
4 to 7
COMMON ORDER
WP (MD) NO.10328 / 2018 The writ petitioners are the Hereditary Trustees of Arulmighu Mariamman Temple, Irukkankudi, Virudhunagar District. The said temple is a public religious institution and defined as a “Temple” within the meaning of Section 6(20) of Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable 7/24 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018 10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014 Endowments Act, 1959 (in short " the Act"). As per the order of the Board dated 16.08.1926 in O.A.No.266, the temple administration is vested with the Hereditary Trustees of the temple.
2.Originally, there were six Hereditary Trustees and the said Hereditary Trustees were performing poojas and hence, they happened to be Trustees cum Poosaris. By virtue of Board's Order No.1000 (OA No. 160 of 1934) dated 04.05.1935, a Scheme was framed for the administration of the temple and a post of Manager was created to supervise the employees of the temple and to assist the Trustees of the temple in the day today administration.
3.Later, in O.A.No.9/1955, dated 31.05.1955, the Deputy Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Tanjore, ordered that the post of Manager shall be replaced by an Executive Officer and now it is upgraded as Assistant Commissioner. A Chairman to the Board of Trustees is elected by the Trustees. However, there were allegations and counter allegations and for each and every tenure, Chairman was elected with the intervention of this Court.
8/24 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018 10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014
4.In the meanwhile, the number of Hereditary Trustees was increased from 6 to 11. Thereafter, the Commissioner suo motu reduced the number of Trustees from 11 to 6, which was challenged before this Court and a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.527, 528, 576 and 577 of 2010 and WP (MD) Nos.3040, 3517 and 4287 of 2010 dated 21.02.2011 set aside the suo motu order passed in O.A.No.4 of 2000 dated 08.01.2010 and further directed that the 11 Trustees will remain till the disposal of the suit in O.S.No.54 of 2007 on the file of the Sub Court, Sivakasi. As such, the 11 Hereditary Trustees are continuing.
5.For the subsequent years also, election was conducted under the intervention of this Court and one S.R.M.Ramamoorthy Poosari was elected to serve as Chairman of Board of Trustees on 07.03.2014. The first respondent passed order in G.O.(P) No.59 dated 18.06.2014 restrained the period of tenure to the post of Chairman as two years and as such, the tenure of S.R.M.Ramamoorthy Poosari came to end on 06.03.2016. However, the said order in G.O.(P) No.59 dated 18.06.2014 was challenged in O.S.No.2 of 2015 on the file of the District Munsif, Sathur. Later, it was withdrawn. After that, the office of the Chairman is lying 9/24 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018 10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014 vacant. However, there were allegations and counter allegations against the Trustees between themselves and there are very many Civil and Criminal disputes pending till date. A writ petition was filed to suspend S.R.M.Ramamoorthy Poosari as Chairman, Board of Trustees. This Court directed the first respondent to consider the claim, after giving opportunity to all the parties.
6.Accordingly, an enquiry was contemplated by the first respondent and a letter was issued in No.14425/RE 3-1/2016 - 5 dated 21.03.2018 calling upon the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, to make a preliminary enquiry and submit a report. However, the letter dated 21.03.2018 of the first respondent has been challenged in WP (MD) No.7676 of 2018 and an interim order of stay was obtained. Therefore, the conduct of election could not be progressed as the disciplinary proceedings are pending against the Chairman of Board of Trustees. At this juncture, the petitioners have approached this Court for a direction directing the respondents to conduct elections.
7.The private respondents viz., respondents 5 to 10 have filed counter affidavit making various allegations against each other and contended that the Trustees are ineligible to hold the post of Chairman. As 10/24 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018 10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014 observed supra, there are several litigations both Civil and Criminal are pending till date. However, this Court is not inclined to conduct any roving enquiry into those factual disputes, as it falls with the realm of the respective Courts and competent authorities under this Act.
8.Be that as it may, this Court, at an earlier instance, has directed the official respondents to conduct election, despite there was enquiry against the Hereditary Trustees. Now that, the post of Chairman is lying vacant from 07.03.2016 and elections are not conducted due to the pendency of the suit in O.S.No.54 of 2007 on the file of Sub Court, Sivakasi and various litigations, criminal proceedings pending against the Hereditary Trustees.
9.As noted above, as per the order passed by this Court in the previous writ petition, this Court is of the view that the pendency of the Civil litigations will not be a bar for conduct of elections. Therefore, a direction is issued to the respondents 1 to 4 to hold elections to the post of Chairman to the Board of Trustees for Arulmighu Mariamman Temple, Irukkankudi, Virudhunagar District, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Accordingly, WP (MD) No.10328 of 2018 stands allowed. 11/24 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018 10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014 WP (MD) NO.7676 / 2018
10.This Court in WP (MD) No.17771 of 2016 dated 21.08.2017 passed the following order:
“This Court, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case as well as taking into consideration the provisions of Section 53(2) of the Act, however, without going into the merits of the rival contentions raised in this writ petition, directs the first respondent – Secretary to the Government, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009, who is the competent authority under Section 53 of the Act, to consider the claim of the petitioner in the light of the representation made by the petitioner dated 26.07.2016 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the fifth respondent, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner as well as the fifth respondent are permitted to submit all the relevant documents in support of their claims to the first respondent forthwith. “ 12/24 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018 10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014
11.As per the directions of this Court, the first respondent conducted an enquiry on 31.10.2017. There is a recommendation from the Assistant Commissioner of the Temple to suspend the then Chairman S.R.M.Ramamoorthy in view of the allegations of theft and the criminal case pending in Crime No.153/2016 and also in view of arrest and remand of the said person to judicial custody and so many allegations were made against each of the Trustees. Therefore, the first respondent issued a letter dated 21.03.2018 to the second respondent as under:
“7.During the enquiry, it has been brought to the notice of the Government about various allegations, counter allegations, charges, misappropriation of funds, mismanagement by the trustees of the temple. The Hereditary Trustees mutually blamed each other regarding the mismanagement of temple administration and misappropriation of temple funds. FIRs in the Police Station were filed by the temple administration against the hereditary trustees and the same are pending. The Commissioner has also recommended to the Government for framing of charges against Tvl.S.R.M.Ramamurthy Poosari, S.Marimuthu Poosari, R.Ariram Poosari, S.Kathiresan Poosari, S.Ramar Poosari, 13/24 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018 10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014 S/o.Sankaralingam Poosari and S.Ramar Poosari, S/o.Sangaigh Poosari for misappropriation of funds and maladministration.
8.In this regard, the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department has been requested to conduct a detailed enquiry on the allegations levelled against the trustees, as per act after providing fair and equal opportunity to all the persons concerned and send the report accordingly. On receipt of the report from the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, the Government will initiate appropriate action against such trustees as per the provisions enumerated under Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. With the above observations, the petition is disposed off.”
12.From the perusal of the order passed by this Court in WP (MD) No.17771 of 2016, the first respondent was directed to consider the request of the petitioner in the aspect of suspending the Chairman, Board of Trustees. Whereas, there were lot of factual allegations made against each other and therefore, a request was made to conduct a detailed enquiry 14/24 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018 10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014 against the allegations levelled against the Trustees and to send a report to the Government for initiation of appropriate action against such Trustees as per the provisions enumerated under Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. The above letter does not confer power on the Commissioner to initiate any action with regard to the suspension or removal of the Trustees. It only calls for conduct of factual enquiry into the allegations and counter allegations and submit a report. It is categorically observed that on the basis of the report, the first respondent will initiate appropriate action against the Trustees. Hence, the decision making power is still lies with the first respondent and what is directed in the impugned letter is only to conduct a factual enquiry into the allegation and not to take action against the request for suspension. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the contention of the petitioner that the powers of the Government was delegated to the Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department. Therefore, there is no merit in the writ petition.
Accordingly, WP (MD) No.7676 of 2018 stands dismissed. WP (MD) NO.10676 / 2019 15/24 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018 10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014
13.Yet another Trustee has made allegations against two other Trustees on the ground that a person cannot hold two permanent posts and if it is found that he is holding two posts, monetary benefits given to one post shall be recovered.
14.According to the petitioner, the third respondent herein, while getting the share of a Poosari of Arulmighu Mariamman Temple, Irukkankudi, Virudhunagar District, he was working as a permanent/full time Driver in the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation and also getting salary for the same. Likewise, the fourth respondent, while receiving his share as a Poosari, was working as a permanent / full time Record Clerk at Arulmighu Vannai Vinayagar Temple, Odaipatti and receiving salary for the same. The petitioner got this information under Right to Information Act, 2005 and made a complaint against the respondents 3 and 4 to the first respondent. The first respondent conducted enquiry and made recommendation for suitable action against the respondents 3 and 4. Accordingly, the fourth respondent was suspended from the post of Record Clerk on 02.03.2015. Thereafter, he was allowed to go on Voluntary Retirement with all terminal benefits. The third respondent attained the age of superannuation and he was permitted to 16/24 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018 10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014 retire from service with all terminal benefits. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner made a representation dated 08.04.2019 to the respondents 1 and 2. The first respondent directed the second respondent in his proceedings dated 16.04.2019 to take necessary action against the respondents 3 and 4. But, so far, no action has been taken. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner is before this Court.
15.Per contra, the contesting respondents viz., respondents 3 and 4 had denied all the allegations levelled against them.
16.However, this Court is not inclined to go into the factual dispute between the parties. In fact, it is noted that the second respondent has already submitted a report to the first respondent on 28.05.2019 for appropriate action. In the meantime, the first respondent has forwarded a report to the Commissioner vide proceedings dated 03.02.2017 in Na.Ka.No.6387/2016/A1 for framing appropriate charges under Section 53 of the Act as against the fourth respondent and by proceedings dated 07.11.2016 in Na.Ka.No.6385/2016/A1 for initiating appropriate action against the third respondent under Section 53 of the Act. The Commissioner also forwarded the proposal to the Secretary to Government, who is the competent authority, who in turn directed the 17/24 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018 10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014 Commissioner to hold a preliminary enquiry and filed a report by proceedings dated 21.03.2018. However, the proceedings could not be progressed in view of the stay order granted by this Court in WP (MD) No. 7676 of 2018 in respect of powers of delegation by the Government to the Commissioner under Section 53 of the Act.
17.Now that, this Court has already held in WP (MD) No.7676 of 2018 that the Government letter issued does not amount to delegation of power, but it is only a request to complete the factual enquiry and not the delegation to take decision under Section 53 of the Act. Therefore, there being no hurdle to conduct the enquiry proceedings. The parties are at liberty to approach the Commissioner for completion of the enquiry proceedings.
The Writ Petition in WP (MD) No.10676 of 2019 is disposed of with the above direction.
WP (MD) NO.19107 / 2014
18.The writ petitioner has preferred the above writ petition challenging the order of the second respondent in recognising the third respondent as Hereditary Trustee of the temple. 18/24 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018 10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014
19.According to the petitioner, the eldest male member of the family shall be appointed as Hereditary Trustee and the third respondent, being a female heir is not entitled to hold the post of Hereditary Trustee and on the other hand, the petitioner, being the eldest male member must have been appointed as Hereditary Trustee.
20.The short background reveals that originally, one Jothiyan Poosari was holding the post of Hereditary Trustee. After his demise, his son Subbiah Poosari was appointed as Hereditary Trustee. His appointment was challenged by the other brothers. The Commissioner, in his order in R.P.No.169/1975 dated 23.03.1977 held that the eldest male member alone can hold the post of Hereditary Trustee and others cannot claim right over the same. As per the order, the appointment of said Subbiah Poosari as Hereditary Trustee was confirmed. After the demise of Subbiah Poosari, his son R.Marimuthu Poosari applied to the second respondent for recognising him as a Hereditary Trustee. The petitioner and his brother had raised objections. However, by order dated 10.04.2003, the second respondent registered the said Marimuthu Poosari as a Hereditary Trustee. The said Marimuthu Poosari died on 23.10.2009 leaving behind 19/24 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018 10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014 him his two daughters, the third respondent and another. However, no orders were passed on the petition filed by the third respondent. Therefore, she preferred the writ petition in WP No.4287 of 2010, wherein a direction was given to the second respondent to dispose of the petition filed by the third respondent vide order dated 21.02.2011.
21.The first respondent has enquired into the matter and found that as per Section 54(1) of the Act, the person next in the line of succession alone shall be entitled to succeed in the office. The statutory provision does not specify that it should be a male member. A person next in the line of succession can either be a male or female. Any discrimination between male and female would offend Section 14 of the Constitution of India.
22.It is imperative to note that the issue is no longer res integra. In the judgment of SEENI @ SUNDARAMMAL VS. S.CHELLAIAH ALIAS SANKARALINGAM POOSARI this Court has upheld the appointment of a female to the office of Archagar. In the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in RAJ KALI KUOR VS. RAM RATTAN it is held that a widow was entitled to succeed the office of Poosari and share in the emoluments after getting the services performed by a deputy. So, the 20/24 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018 10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014 Courts have repeatedly held that a woman can very well hold the office of Poosari and a Trustee excepting the actual performance of religious rituals which she can very well get done by a deputy. The said judgment squarely applies to the present case on hand.
23.The contention of the petitioner that primogeniture means the eldest male member is not sustainable. Primogeniture means an eldest legal heir. It does not confine to male or female. Therefore, the claim of the petitioner that he is the eldest available male member to be appointed as a Hereditary Trustee is not sustainable.
24.Further, the Commissioner has gone into the genealogy and found that after the appointment of Subbiah Poosari, his son Marimuthu Poosari was already appointed as Trustee. The claim of appointment of Hereditary Trustee by the petitioner was rejected at the earlier instance. Thereafter, it is descended on the son of Subbiah Poosari and then to his heirs. The petitioner cannot seek reversal proposal to go back to find out the next in the line of succession from Subbiah Poosari at any stretch of imagination, next in the line of succession, will not go on the reverse. Even assuming that the petitioner is in the line of succession, his request was rejected at two instances for two generations. He has not agitated the same but accepted the rejection. Hence, after crossing two generations, he 21/24 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018 10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014 cannot state his claim. Such procedure is not contemplated either in Act or in the Scheme framed for this temple. Therefore also, the petitioner is not entitled to the relief sought for by him.
Accordingly, WP (MD) No.19107 of 2014 stands dismissed.
25.In the result,
(i) WP (MD) No.10328 of 2018 is allowed.
(ii) WP (MD) No.7676 of 2018 is dismissed.
(iii) WP (MD) No.10676 of 2019 is disposed of.
(iv) WP (MD) No.19107 of 2014 is dismissed.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
30.04.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
TK
22/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018
10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014
To
1.The Secretary to Government
Government of Tamil Nadu
Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Dept., Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Commissioner Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Dept., Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai.
3.The Joint Commissioner Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Dept., Sivagangai.
4.The Assistant Commissioner / Executive Officer Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Dept., Arulmighu Mariamman Thirukoil Irukkankudi, Virudhunagar District.
23/24 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018 10676 OF 2019 & 19107 OF 2014 M.GOVINDARAJ, J.
TK WP (MD) NOS.10328 & 7676 OF 2018 10676 OF 2019 AND 19107 OF 2014 30.04.2021 24/24 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/