JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was made by P.B.BALAJI,J.)

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 Writ Petitioner that 5 respectable persons would be appointed as trustees of the temple board by a Sengunthar Sabha, a registered society.

While so, the Tamil Nadu Government passed an Ordinance which subsequently became a legislation in Act 15 of 2006, in and whereby, the period of office of trustees was reduced from 3 years to one year. Consequent to the same, 5 trustees surrendered their trusteeship on 23.08.2006, pursuant to a meeting of the Board of trustees held on 21.08.2006. One Mr.K.B.Punniyakotti was appointed as fit person of the Temple by the Commissioner HR&CE in and by order dated 20.01.2007. The said order appointing a fit person was challenged by the erstwhile trustee, Mr.D.Chandrasekar in W.P.No.4799 of 2007 and the said Writ Petition was dismissed by this Court on 29.07.2010. Subsequently, the office bearers of the Sengunthar Sabha, headed by a President were elected in the year 2006, their tenure ending 30.06.2009. In view of the tenure coming to a close, a general body meeting was convened on 14.06.2009, in order to fix a date for convening the election to elect the new office bearers. However, the meeting did not go on smoothly and the election was challenged on the ground that required quorum was not there and unilaterally, the respondents had declared themselves as elected members in an arbitrary and high handed fashion. According to the Writ Petitioner, since the scheme is already in place, only the competent authority can appoint trustees from amongst the members of the Sengunthar community, in terms of the Scheme. The petitioner further stated that the Secretary of the Sabha took up the matter with the Joint Commissioner HR&CE, by recommending two persons to be appointed as trustees to the temple and like wise the remaining vacancies were also sought to be filled up by similar recommendations.

3. A Civil Suit in O.S.No.5649 of 2009 came to be filed, challenging the validity of the election of the office bearers in the election held on 14.06.2009. It is the grievance of the Writ Petitioner that without taking into consideration any of these facts, the respondents have passed the impugned order, appointing respondents 3 to 7 as trustees of the temple.

On these facts, the Writ Petitioner challenged the impugned order.

4. Before the Writ Court, a counter affidavit has been filed by the Commissioner of HR&CE stating that the temple in question is under the administrative control of the department, governed by a scheme of administration that was framed by the Deputy Commissioner, HR&CE. According to the department, persons belonging to Sengunthar community, residing in 13 streets situated in Saidapet, Chennai-600 015 are eligible to be appointed as non-hereditary trustees. The trust board has been duly constituted in terms of the scheme and the same is challenged in the Writ Petition without any substance or basis whatsoever. It is further stated that even the