Back
2016 Supreme(Mad) 1506
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R. SUBBIAH, J.
C.L. Rajendran - Petitioner
Versus
The Commissioner Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department Madras & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 30530 of 2015 and M.P. No. 1 of 2015
Decided On : 02-06-2016
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. R. Shanmugam
For the Respondents: Mr. K.V. Dhanapalan
Lack of locus standi and the inability to compel an authority to act beyond its obligations under the relevant Act.
Headnote:
Mandamus - Free Food Provision - Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 - Section 46(iii) - Summary: The court dismissed the petitioner's claim for a Writ of Mandamus directing the restoration of free food provision at the temple. The court found that the petitioner lacked locus standi and that the relief sought would compel the first respondent to act beyond his obligations under the Act. The court cited the Act and previous case law to support its decision.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought a Writ of Mandamus to restore the practice of providing free food to the staff members of a temple and to suspend the collection of entry fees for darshan. The petitioner claimed to be an ardent devotee of the temple and alleged that the second respondent had taken arbitrary decisions contrary to established customs.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner lacked locus standi and had filed the petition in the nature of a public interest litigation to gain popularity. It concluded that the relief sought would compel the first respondent to act beyond his obligations under the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act.
Issues: Locus standi of the petitioner, authority of the second respondent, and the obligation of the first respondent under the Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner lacked locus standi and that the relief sought would compel the first respondent to act beyond his obligations under the Act. It cited previous case law to support its decision.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and no costs were awarded. The connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
The petitioner seeks for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to restore the healthy practice of providing free food to the entire staff members of Kanda Kottam of Sri Muthukumarasamy Devasthanam as has been followed for several hundred years and also to suspend the practice of converting Kanda Kottam into one of 'profit making commercial establishment' by charging/collecting entry fee of Rs.10/-and Rs.100/-per person to have the 'dharshan' of Lord Muruga at the heart burnings of the entire Beri Chetty Community people who founded the Kanda Kottam temple of Sri Muthukumarasamy Devasthanam about 450 years back as well as the heart burnings of general devotees of 'Lord Muruga' of Kanda Kottam Sri Muthukumarasamy Devasthanam, Rasappa Chetty Street, Madras -3 by considering his representation dated 15.09.2015 on its merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.
2. The petitioner claims to be an ardent devotee of Lord Muruga of Kanda Kottam Sri Muthukumarasamy Devasthanam situated at Rasappa Chetty Street, Park Town, Chennai. According to the petitioner the entire expenses relating to maintenance and management of the temple is being done by elected Trustees as per the terms of the scheme decree passed by this Court in Civil Suit No. 117 of 1907 and as per the decision taken by the founders of the family belonging to Beri Chetty Community who founded the Kandakottam temple. Out of the temple funds, there was a practice and custom of providing free food to the staff members of the temple and it was continued till 15.09.2015. However, all of a sudden, the second respondent, on his appointment as Fit Person of the temple, has taken an arbitrary and unauthorised decision to suspend the custom of providing free food to the staff members. According to the petitioner, the second respondent is not empowered to act contrary to the healthy practice and custom of providing free food to the entire staff members which was followed for several years. Further, the second respondent is attempting to convert the temple administration into one of profit making commercial establishment by collecting entry fee of Rs.10/- and Rs.100/- for darshan of the deity and this is contrary to the scheme decree passed by this Court. In such circumstances, the petitioner has given a representation dated 15.09.2015 to the first respondent in person but the same has not been considered, hence, the petitioner has come up with this writ petition before this Court.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that he is only seeking for issuing a direction to the first respondent to pass orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 15.09.2015 and it is for the first respondent to consider his claim of the petitioner on its own merits.
4. The learned Additional Government Pleader (HR & CE), relying on the counter affidavit of the second respondent, vehemently opposed the writ petition. According to the learned Additional Government Pleader, the temple in question is under the administrative and supervisory control of the first respondent and it has been included in the list published under Section 46(iii) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 (Tamil Nadu Act XXIII of 1959) (hereinafter called as The Act). Even though the temple was previously managed by Beri Chetty Community People, their term of office expired and the Government appointed the second respondent as Fit Person to perform the functions of the Trustees. After taking over the administration of the temple, it was found that the funds of the temple were unauthorisedly utilised in the guise of providing free food for the temple employees who are already receiving salary on par with the Government servants as per the norms fixed by the Government in time scale of pay. Further, no where under the Act, the second respondent or the executive authorities of the temple are authorised to provide free meals to employees
