Back
D. KRISHNAKUMAR, P. B. BALAJI
K. M. Murthy – Appellant
Versus
K. B. Punniyakotti (deceased R1) – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer:- Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letter Patent praying to set aside the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.6295 of 2011 dated 22.12.2011.)
P.B. Balaji, J.
1. The respondents 3 to 7 in the Writ Petition have preferred the present Writ Appeal against the order of the learned Single Judge allowing W.P.No.6295 of 2011, setting aside the impugned order passed by the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) department and to consequently appoint trustees to the temple, Arulthiru Sivasubramaniya Swamy Temple, Saidapet as per the scheme passed in O.A.No.76 of 1965.
2. Brief facts that are necessary for adjudicating the issues involved in the present Writ Appeal are as follows:
The 1st respondent in the present Writ Appeal (since deceased) approached the Writ Court, contending that the temple viz,. Arulthiru Sivasubramaniya Swamy Temple, Saidapet, belongs to Sengunthar community members living in 13 streets of Saidapet, Chennai-600 015. The further case pleaded by the Writ Petitioner was that a scheme was framed on 28.10.1986 by the Deputy Commissioner of HR&CE for the purposes of administering the temple, in O.A.No.76/65. It was the further case of
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the HR&CE Department has the power to appoint non-hereditary trustees, but when a scheme is already in force, trustees must be appointed only ....
Temple or its precincts cannot be made a place where political parties should look forward to give political asylum to their workers.
Point of Law : Temple or its precincts cannot be made a place where political parties should look forward to give political asylum to their workers.
The government cannot unilaterally alter the term of trustees without following the statutory procedures outlined in relevant laws; modifications must comply with Section 64(5) of the Act.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the conflict between the impugned order and the Scheme Decree, and the applicability of Section 47(3) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Char....
The court affirmed the hereditary trusteeship of defendants, ruling that plaintiffs failed to prove mismanagement or entitlement to non-hereditary trusteeship under the Hindu Religious Charitable End....
The appointment of non-hereditary trustees is valid under the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act when there is evidence of mismanagement by hereditary trustees, and full legal procedures a....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the protection of the rights of religious denominations under Section 107 of the Act and Articles 25 & 26 of the Constitution, and the requireme....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
