SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 9424

HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J
B.RAMAKRISHNAN – Appellant
Versus
THE COMMISSIONER, HINDU RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT BOARD – Respondent
W.P.No.6019 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms.D.Jaipriya
For the Respondents: Mr.S.Ravi Chandran Additional Government Pleader

The Commissioner holds discretion to review matters regarding trustee appointments under HR & CE Act, based on valid grounds.

Headnote:The court considered a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, focusing on the petitioner's appeal dated 23.10.2024 regarding the appointment of hereditary Trustees under Section 69(2) HR & CE Act, 1959. The petitioner's request for a review was noted, establishing that the decision lies within the Commissioner’s discretion. The court ordered the Commissioner to consider the representation and conclude within twelve weeks. Therefore, the petition is disposed of as stated.

Table of Content
1. writ petition aimed at regulation of trustee appointments. (Para 1)
2. court discusses the discretion of the commissioner on the review of matters. (Para 2)
3. court orders a decision on the petitioner's representation. (Para 3)

ORDER

The writ petition is filed with a prayer to direct the first respondent to consider and dispose the petitioner's appeal dated 23.10.2024 filed under Section 69(2) of HR & CE Act, 1959, against the order made in O.A.No.72/1954 dated 16.12.1954 and M.P. No.3 of 1980 dated 31.08.1980.

2. On a perusal of the affidavit as well as the representation submitted by the petitioner, it is clear that the petitioner is aggrieved by the action of appointment of hereditary Trustees. The petitioner has not filed any appeal in time and till now the petitioner has not filed any appeal. Therefore, the prayer as such cannot be countenanced. What is prayed for in the representation is a request for the authority namely the first respondent – the Commissioner, to exercise his suo moto power. It is at the discretion of the Commissioner and only if the situation warrants and the grounds exists, the Commissioner exercise the suo moto power. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed on the following terms:-

(i) The first respondent – the Commissioner may consider the representation of the petitioner dated 23.10.2024 and take a decision, in accordance with law, whether he would decide to take suo moto review in the matter or not. The decision taken may be communicated to the petitioner in writing.

(ii) The above exercise shall be completed within a period of twelve weeks from date of receipt/production of the website uploaded copy of this order without waiting for the certified copy of the order.

(iii) No costs.

21.02.2025 Neutral Citation: Yes/No nsl To

1. THE COMMISSIONER, HINDU RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT BOARD, NO.119, UTHAMAR GANDHI SALAI, NUNGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI-600 034.

2. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER, HINDU RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT BOARD, ARULMIGHU SRI KOTTAI MARIAMMAN TEMPLE CAMPUS, SALEM-636 001.

3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, HINDU RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT BOARD, ARULMIGHU SRI KOTTAI MARIAMMAN TEMPLE CAMPUS, SALEM-636 001.

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

nsl

21.02.2025

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top