The removal of a religious endowment trustee for misappropriation relies on the preponderance of probability, not criminal conviction standards. Hereditary trustees are subject to succession rules, requiring a transparent, inquiry-based recognition process that includes rigorous verification of statutory disqualifications and asset protection obligations.

ORDER :

D. BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

A. The Common Facts :

1.1. All these Writ Petitions relate to 'Nacharammal Kattalai', a religious endowment connected to Arulmigu Koodalazhagar Temple, Madurai and as such are taken up and disposed of by this common order.

1.2. The prayers in each of the Writ Petitions are different and have to be dealt with individually as per merits. However, certain background facts are common, which may be noted and are as follows:

1.3. By a duly registered document dated 20.03.1923, an endowment was created by three persons viz., (1) Nacharammal @ Vellaiammal, (2) Ammapillai @ Rakkaye Ammal and (3) Seeniammal @ Andathaiammal. Upon perusal of the document, it can be seen that one Ponnusankaran Pillai married one Ammakutty ammal as his first wife. Thereafter, he married one Mookayi ammal as his second wife. Through Mookayi Ammal, a daughter, namely Pichaiammal, was born. After the death of the aforesaid two wives, for want of a male descendant, Ponnusankaran Pillai married the aforesaid three persons who have executed the document as his wives. However, through Nacharammal, a girl child, namely Sethu @ Ponnammal, was born.

1.4. Under the said circumstances, the above dedication was made for the maintenance of the Mandagapadi Mandapam and for the conduct of the Mandagapadi of Lord Kallazhagar during the Chithirai festival. The details of which were also mentioned in the deed. The properties mentioned therein were dedicated. The said document also dealt with another purpose, namely, the maintenance of the Samadhi of Ponnusankaran Pillai.

1.5. Thereafter, on 30.09.1955, a scheme was framed in O.A.No.111 of 1953 relating to the administration of the endowment, through hereditary trusteeship. On 04.04.1967, by an order in O.A.No.3 of 1967, a modified scheme was framed, whereby it is ordered that hereditary trustees will be appointed from the three clans representing Senior Muthusamy Pillai, Junior Muthusamy Pillai and Sundararaja / Velusamy Pillai branches, along with two non-hereditary trustees.

1.6. By an order dated 14.02.1974, one Sethuraman was recognised as hereditary trustee representing the Junior Muthusamy Pillai branch. By an order dated 02.02.1993, M.Thiruppathi succeeded him as the hereditary trustee in the Junior Muthusamy Pillai branch. After his suspension, on 15.02.2010, one Pichaiammal @ Kamatchiammal was recognised as hereditary trustee representing the Junior Muthusamy Pillai branch. Thereafter, upon petition that the said Pichaiammal@ Kamatchiammal was getting older and was unable to discharge her functions, she was removed, and a fit person was appointed. Further, inter se litigations are pending, and applications have also been called for the further appointment of hereditary and non-hereditary trustees. Aggrieved by all that, with various prayers, the present Writ Petitions and a Contempt Petition have been filed.

B. Writ Petition (MD) No.30377 of 2024:

2. In the scheme of things, it is first essential to consider the Writ Petition filed by one M.Thiruppathi, S/o A.Muthusamy Pillai, in W.P.(MD).No. 30377 of 2024. M.Thiruppathi is the grandson of Nacharammal, who was the first person who executed the deed of endowment dated 23.04.1923. He was recognised as a hereditary trustee with effect from 02.02.1993 and was functioning as such. While so, by an order dated 25.01.2010, four charges were levelled against him, and he was suspended from the hereditary trusteeship. His explanation with reference to the said charges was called for. All the charges are interconnected and relate to