The court upheld the appointment of a fit person for temple administration under Section 49 of the H.R.&C.E. Act, emphasizing the need for substantiated claims regarding trusteeship amid ongoing disputes.

ORDER :

K.KUMARESH BABU, J.

Challenge in the Writ Petition in W.P.No.14484 of 2023 is an order of appointment of a fit person pending the framing of a scheme in respect of Arul Migu Sree Periyanayagi Amman Thirukovil and Karuppar Alayam.

2. W.P.No.25487 of 2024 is to give effect to the order impugned in 14484 of 2023.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the Writ Petitioner in W.P.No. would submit that the temples Arul Migu Sree Periyanayagi Amman Thirukovil and Karuppar Alayam had been in existence of more than 200 years and had been administered and maintained by the ancestors of the petitioner. The family of the petitioner had administered and maintained the temple all along and that presently he is the hereditary trustee of the said temple. While that being so, the third respondent herein had attempted to put-spoke in the administration of the temple with a sole intention to take over the same. Hence, the petitioner had also instituted a Suit in O.S.No.131 of 2018 on the file of Sub-court, Ramanathapuram and the same is pending. The third respondent herein had also filed a Writ Petition in W.P.(MD).No.19629 of 2022 seeking for a mandamus to direct the temple to be administered by the seven members representing all the communities of the villagers and the same came to be disposed of, with a direction to the official respondents to consider the same and pass orders. Based upon the said directions, the first respondent herein by order dated 11.10.2022, appointed a fit person without affording any opportunity to the persons interested and the same came to be challenged by the petitioner in W.P.(MD).No.25682 of 2022. This Court by order dated 04.01.2023 had set aside the same with a direction to the official respondents to conduct a detailed enquiry and also the allegations against the petitioner by way of the evidence and then pass appropriate decision. Pursuant to the said order, notice was issued by the first respondent on 17.03.2023, calling upon the petitioner under Section 49 of the H.R.&C.E., Act. However without considering any of the objections raised by the petitioner or assigning any independent reasons, the present impugned order had been passed. Hence, he had approached this Court in the instant Writ Petition. He would submit that a temple is being administered by the petitioner, as a hereditary trustee and therefore, there was no necessity for framing a scheme with regard to the temple. He would further submit that all the allegations against the petitioner had not been proved either under the impugned order or had an enquiry been conducted to that effect to prove such maladministration and therefore, he would submit that the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

4. Countering his arguments, the learned Additional Government Pleader would submit that pursuant to the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD).No.25682 of 2022, a notice of hearing was given to the petitioner and the petitioner and others had appeared before the first respondent and had recorded their statements. It was also to be noted that the Revenue Tahsildar of the Taluk concerned had also conducted a Peace Committee meeting on a dispute that had arisen between the petitioner and the third respondent and other villagers. Considering the fact that the temple is more than 200 years old and is a public temple and that the petitioner had unilaterally claimed that he is a hereditary trustee for the temple. It had became imperative of the first respondent to frame a scheme for the temple. If the petitioner is able to substantiate his claim of hereditary trustee or if the private respondents substantiate