Madras High Court
Arulmighu Pachaivazhi Amman Koil vs The Commissioner on 12 June, 2025
Author: N.Anand Venkatesh
Bench: N. Anand Venkatesh
WP No. 20784 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12-06-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
WP No. 20784 of 2025
AND
WMP NO. 23449 OF 2025,WMP NO. 23450 OF 2025
1. Arulmighu Pachaivazhi Amman Koil
Alayam Moondru Vagariakal, Rep. By
Mr. K. Natarajan, S/o.
P. Krishnamoorthy, 45, Poosalikuppam,
Abatharanapuram, Kurinjipadi Taluk,
Cuddalore District.
Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Commissioner
Department Of Hindu Religious And
Charitable Endowments, No.119,
Utthamar Gandhi Road,
Nungambakkam High Road,
Chennai-34.
2.The Joint Commissioner
Department Of Hindu Religious And
Charitable Endowments, No.198a,
Appavu Street, Manjakuppam,
Cuddalore.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/06/2025 12:28:24 pm )
WP No. 20784 of 2025
3.The Assistant Commissioner
Department Of Hindu Religious And
Charitable Endowments, No.198A,
Appavu Street, Manjakuppam,
Cuddalore.
4.The Fit Person /Executive Officer
Arulmigu Ayyanar, Vinyagar And
Mariamman Koil, Kunji Kuppam,
Kurinjipadi Taluk, Cuddalore District.
5.The Inspector
Department Of Hindu Religious And
Charitable Endowments, Kurinjipadi
Taluk, Cuddalore District.
Respondent(s)
PRAYER
Writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of
writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the Third respondent in relation to
his proceedings in Sa.Mu.Nata Na.Ka.No.2923/2024/A1 dated 29.05.2025 and
to quash the same as against the Law and illegal and without jurisdiction and
pass orders.
For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.Kaviveerappan
For Respondent(s): Mr.K.Karthikeyan
Government Advocate for R1 to
R5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/06/2025 12:28:24 pm )
WP No. 20784 of 2025
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 29.05.2025 wherein a fit person has been appointed by the Department to take care of the administration of Arulmighu Pachaivazhi Amman temple at Kurinjipadi Taluk, Cuddalore District.
2. Heard Mr.M.Kaviveerappan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.Karthikeyan, learned Government Advocate for Respondents 1 to 5.
3. The petitioner is a member of three Vagariakal Families who belonged to a particular community and the poosari for the temple comes from these Vagariakal families and they have been managing and administering the temple for many generations. In the year 2000, one S.Devaraju started claiming himself as a Dharmakarta of the temple and he filed a suit for permanent injunction before the Principal District Munsif Court, Cuddalore in OS No.520 of 2000. In this suit, the representatives of the three vagariakal families were added as defendants. The suit was decreed by judgement and decree dated 10.04.2006. Aggrieved by the same, an appeal was filed in AS No.42 of 2006 before the II Additional Sub Court, Cuddalore. The Appellate Court after considering the facts and circumstances of the case and on appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, came to a categorical conclusion that the temple is under the administration of the three vagariakal families for a long https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/06/2025 12:28:24 pm ) WP No. 20784 of 2025 period of time and they were conducting the poojas and were administering and managing the temple. Accordingly, the judgement and decree of the Trial Court was set-aside. The second appeal filed against the judgement of the Appellate Court in SA No.542 of 2008 came to be dismissed for non-prosecution on 14.02.2019. Thereafter, the families belonging to the three vagariakal were managing and administering the temple and conducting the poojas.
4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 3rd respondent through proceedings dated 29.05.2025 proceeded to appoint a Fit Person to administer and manage the temple without giving any opportunity to the petitioner. It is under these circumstances, the present writ petition came to be filed before this Court.
5. The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that serious complaints were received by the department against the management and administration of the temple. Hence, notice was issued to the petitioner and since the notice was evaded, it was affixed in the temple wall. Only thereafter, the Fit Person was appointed as a temporary measure till the appointment of the board of trustees. Hence, the learned Government Advocate sought for the dismissal of this writ petition. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/06/2025 12:28:24 pm ) WP No. 20784 of 2025
6. The power to appoint a Fit Person vests with the Assistant Commissioner as per Section 49 of the HR&CE Act on fulfillment of two contingencies viz., (1) The temple in question must be a religious institution and (2) the authority must be satisfied that there is a maladministration of the institution by the existing Trustees. Before passing an order under Section 49 appointing a Fit Person, there must be some material or reference in the order to show that there was mismanagement of the temple. On carefully reading the impugned proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 29.05.2025, this Court finds that there is neither a specific allegation of maladministration nor recording of substantive satisfaction based on such allegation. Apart from that, the allegations should be specifically made in the show cause notice and hearing on such allegation should have been made before appointing the Fit Person. Those requirements have not been satisfied in the present case. This is more so since the status of the petitioner and the persons belonging to the three vagariakal families has been recognised by the competent Civil Court by rendering a finding that they were in administration and management of the temple and were doing the pooja.
7. In the light of the above discussion, this Court is inclined to interfere with the impugned proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 29.05.2025 and the same is hereby setaside. The matter is remanded back to the file of the 3rd respondent and the 3rd respondent is directed to issue notice to the petitioner and provide an opportunity to the petitioner and take a decision on merits and https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/06/2025 12:28:24 pm ) WP No. 20784 of 2025 in accordance with law. This process shall be completed by the 3rd respondent within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. In the result, this writ petition is allowed with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
12-06-2025 rka Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/06/2025 12:28:24 pm ) WP No. 20784 of 2025 To
1.The Commissioner Department Of Hindu Religious And Charitable Endowments, No.119, Utthamar Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai-
34.
2.The Joint Commissioner Department Of Hindu Religious And Charitable Endowments, No.198a, Appavu Street, Manjakuppam, Cuddalore.
3.The Assistant Commissioner Department Of Hindu Religious And Charitable Endowments, No.198a, Appavu Street, Manjakuppam, Cuddalore.
4.The Fit Person /executive Officer Arulmigu Ayyanar, Vinyagar And Mariamman Koil, Kunji Kuppam, Kurinjipadi Taluk, Cuddalore District.
5.The Inspector Department Of Hindu Religious And Charitable Endowments, Kurinjipadi Taluk, Cuddalore District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/06/2025 12:28:24 pm ) WP No. 20784 of 2025 N.ANAND VENKATESH J.
rka WP No. 20784 of 2025 WMP NOs. 23449 and 23450 OF 2025 12-06-2025 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/06/2025 12:28:24 pm )