ORDER :

N.Thuja, learned counsel for the sole writ petitioner and Mr.M.Lingadurai, learned Special Government Pleader who accepts notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 4 and 6 are before me.

2. Read this in conjunction with and in continuation of earlier proceedings made in previous listings on 08.11.2021 and 15.11.2021 which read as follows:

Proceedings dated 08.11.2021:

'When the matter was taken up in the admission board, it came to light that the matter pertains to a Kattalai qua 'Arulmigu Papanasanatha Swamy Temple at Papanasam, Tirunelveli District' (hereinafter 'said temple' for the sake of convenience and clarity).

2. From the submissions made by learned counsel for writ petitioner, it comes to light that the Kattalai may qualify as a specific endowment within the meaning of sub-section 19 of Section 6 of 'The Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 (Tamil Nadu Act 22 of 1959)' (hereinafter 'TNHR&CE Act' for the sake of convenience and clarity), but 'temple' is defined in Section 6 (20) of TNHR&CE Act. The array of respondents brings to light that the Executive Officer of the said temple has not been arrayed as a respondent.

3. This Court is of the view that