V. Ramasubramanian, J.

All these writ appeals arise out of the dismissal of a batch of writ petitions challenging the suspension of the hereditary trustees of a special religious endowment and the appointment of a fit person by the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department.

2. We have heard Mr. M. Vallinayagam, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants, Mr. V.R. Shanmuganathan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the Department and Mr. M. Muthugeethayan, learned counsel appearing for the Temple/Fit Person.

3. By a deed of partition, executed on 07.09.1921, three brothers by name Chidambaram Pillai, Malaiperumal Pillai and Paramasivam Pillai, all sons of one Andiappa Pillai, partitioned the properties belonging to the family among themselves. The deed of partition covered several items of properties. One of the properties covered by the deed of partition was described as Item No.4 in the IV-Schedule. The said property was a Mandapam at Door Nos.12, 13, 13-A, 14, 14-A and 14-B, Sannathi Street, Thiruchendur. This property and another property at Alagiyamanavalapuram in Srivaikundam Taluk, Thoothukudi District, were dedicated for the purpose of conduct of the second day mandagapadi in the Tamil months of Avani and Masi in Shri Subramaniyasamy Temple, Thiruchendur. The eldest member of the family, namely Chidambaram Pillai, was entrusted with the obligation of conducting this mandagapadi from out of the income arising from the above properties. The partition deed stipulated that these properties cannot be alienated and that if there was a shortfall in the income, proving it to be inadequate for the conduct of the mandagapadi, the shortfall should be compensated by Chidambaram Pillai and his male heirs.

4. It appears that in the year 1991, the Joint Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, filed a suit in O.S.No.291 of 1991 on the file of the Sub-Court, Tuticorin, seeking a declaration. By a judgment and decree dated 14.09.1995, the Sub-Court declared that the aforesaid properties were “Kattalai Properties”, constituting a specific endowment. The judgment and decree were confirmed by the appellate court in A.S.No.193 of 1996.

5. In the year 2001, the Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments, filed another suit in O.S.No.11 of 2001, for recovery of possession of the property. This suit was transferred to the Additional District Court, Thoothukudi and renumbered as O.S.No.59 of 2004. But, the suit was dismissed by the trial court, by a judgment and decree, dated 20.03.2008, after recording a finding that the hereditary trustees have been duly performing the obligations imposed upon them under the partition deed.

6. However, a third suit was filed by the Joint Commissioner of the Temple in O.S.No.12 of 2011, seeking recovery of possession. But, this suit was in respect of only one of the properties, namely the building at Door No.13-A, Sannathi Street, Thiruchendur. The said suit was filed on the allegation that the hereditary trustees were guilty of mismanagement. Though the suit was decreed by the trial court on 31.03.2010, the first appellate court reversed the said judgment in an appeal in A.S.No.17 of 2010, by a judgment and decree dated 25.04.2013.

7. There was also a fourth suit in O.S.No.68 of 2004, filed by the Joint Commissioner of the Temple for the relief of recovery of possession of one of the properties dedicated to the specific endowment. This suit was decreed ex-parte. But, an application under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure is pending in the Execution Proceedings.

8. Thus, the Temple Administration appears to have been fighting a perennial litigation for the past 25 years, right from 1991, for taking over the possession of the properties, though unsuccessfully. Therefore, the Joint Commissioner at last took recourse to the statutory provisions contained in the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments A