JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the first respondent relating to the impugned order Se.Mu.Na.Ka.No.3300 of 2021 A1 dated --/4/2023 passed by the Joint Commissioner, HR and CE, Kanchipuram - the 1st respondent herein and quash the same)

1. The suspended hereditary trustee of Collah Singanna Chetty Charities (hereinafter called the trust) has filed this writ petition assailing the order passed by the first respondent through proceedings dated --/4/2023 (i) framing charges against the petitioner; (ii) suspending the petitioner pending enquiry under Section 53 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 (for brevity, the Act); and (iii) appointing a fit person to administer the trust.

2. Shorn of unnecessary facts, the grievance that has been expressed by the petitioner is as follows:

(i) The petitioner is the hereditary trustee of the trust from the year 1997 after the demise of his father. He was holding the complete administration and management of the trust and running the trust in line with the object, for which, it was established.

(ii) Earlier also, the petitioner was suspended from the office of the hereditary trustee by the first respondent through proceedings dated 13.10.2008 on the ground that the petitioner was attempting to sell the properties belonging to the trust. The petitioner challenged the earlier order of suspension dated 13.10.2008 before this Court in W.P. No.25511 of 2008. The said writ petition came to be dismissed by this Court by an order dated 05.11.2019.

(iii) Aggrieved by the said order of this Court dated 05.11.2019, the petitioner filed a writ appeal in W.A.No.185 of 2020. A Division Bench of this Court, by a judgment dated 22.9.2020, allowed the said writ appeal by setting aside the earlier order of suspension dated 13.10.2008 passed by the first respondent and further directed the first respondent to pass orders afresh in accordance with law within a period of three months. The Division Bench further continued the interim order that was granted in favour of the petitioner till the matter was finally decided by the first respondent.

(iv) After the Division Bench remanded the matter back to the file of the first respondent, the impugned proceedings came to be issued by framing 26 charges against the petitioner and an enquiry was initiated under Section 53 of the Act. Pending the enquiry, the petitioner was suspended under Section 53(4) of the Act and the fit person was appointed to discharge the duties and perform the functions of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.

3. The first respondent has filed a counter affidavit, explained as to why the enquiry was initiated and reiterated the reasons given in the impugned proceedings. In the counter, the first respondent has stated that various acts of maladministration/mismanagement were identified and nearly 26 charges have been framed against the petitioner. The first respondent has further stated in the counter that the petitioner was alienating and encumbering the immovable properties belonging to the trust according to his whims and fancies and that the very object of the trust was defeated due to the act of the petitioner. It has also been stated in the counter that apart from that, the petitioner did not initiate proper action to safeguard the properties of the trust, that as a result, several properties were knocked away by third parties, who had encroached those lands and that under such circumstances, it was deemed fit and proper to suspend the petitioner pending enquiry and appoint the fit person to streamline the administration of the trust. It has been further stated in the counter that a detailed enquiry has to be conducted in this case and that there is absolutely no ground to int