These two revision petitions are filed by the defendant in the suit namely, the Executive Officer, Arulmigu Pandimuneeswarar Thirukovil, Melamadai, Madurai.

2. The facts leading to the present revisions are as under:-

Arulmigu Pandimuneeswarar Thirukovil, Melamadai at Madurai is a public temple as declared by the decree in A.S.No.1 of 1925 on the file of the 1st Additional Sub Court, Madurai. The temple has been administered by the members of a particular family as trustees cum poojaries. The right of trusteeship has been succeeded hereditarily. The temple has been notified by the Government under Section 46(iii) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act''). As early as 1939, the Commissioner of HR & CE has issued directions to the then trustees to maintain proper accounts and submit the same periodically for scrutiny of the Board and has also recognised the hereditary trusteeship of the members belonging to the family of one Valliammal. In due course, after some litigation between the members of the trustees' family, it has been agreed by them that the hereditary trustees shall perform poojas on weekly turn basis. Accordingly, compromise decree has also been passed in O.S. No. 383/1973 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Madurai Town.

3. On 21.03.2015, a show cause notice was issued to the hereditary trustees why action should not be taken against them for the alleged irregularities and defects in the administration of the temple. At that point of time, there were 8 hereditary trustees. This was challenged by one of the hereditary trustees by name, Saravana Pandian by way of writ petition and the same was allowed pointing out the procedural lapse in the show cause notice. Thereafter, a fresh show cause notice under Section 53 of the Act, framing 12 charges was issued on 02.03.2016 and consequently, the hereditary trustees were placed under suspension pending enquiry and a fit person was appointed to administer the affairs of the temple. This was challenged by some of the suspended trustees.

4. The charge against these suspended trustees includes alienation of the temple property without authority, misappropriation of donations and failure to perform the duty as poojaries of the temple contrarily creating financial loss to the temple for their personal gain. The fit person appointed to administer the affairs of the temple submitted a report to the Joint Commissioner of HR & CE Department, Madurai, who recommended appointment of Executive Officer for the temple. Based on his recommendation, on 12.05.2016, the HR & CE Department passed an order appointing Executive Officer for the said temple under Section 45(1) of the Act. The enquiry conducted against the suspended hereditary trustees concluded with the finding of guilty leading to removal of all the hereditary trustees from the office in exercise of the power under Section 53 of the Act.

5. The suspension of the hereditary trustees, appointment of fit person and appointment of Executive Officer for Arulmigu Pandimuneeswarar Temple were the subject matter of W.A(MD)Nos.1133/2016 etc., batch. The Division Bench of this Court heard all the matters and considering the legal and factual issues involved in the matter, has passed a common judgment on 28.03.2017. Some of the findings in the said judgment which are relevant to these revisions are as under:-

''79. In W.P.(MD)No.11679 of 2016 the prime objection that was raised by the writ petitioner is that he is entitled to a share in the income that may be derived by the temple administration by introducing ticket system and that the temple administration has no right under Section 57 of the Act to introduce such ticket system without even deciding the share of the income that should be given to the poojaris. The representation of the writ petitioner was rejected by the Executive Officer by order dated 20.06.2016. In the order, the Executive Officer referred