Back
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Hon`ble Mr.Justice B.PUGALENDHI
R.Karuppasamy – Appellant
Versus
The joint Commissioner – Respondent
Relief - Temple Administration - Code of Criminal Procedure - Sections 20, 21, 107, 111, 116 - The court ruled that the Tahsildar lacks authority for temple administration decisions, quashing the improper committee resolution and reaffirming HR & CE Department's jurisdiction.
Fact of the Case:
Two writ petitions were filed regarding the Arulmigu Mariamman Temple's administration and disputes between communities. The HR & CE Department was involved in appointing a Fit Person due to ongoing conflicts, and the Tahsildar improperly convened a peace committee meeting to resolve disputes.
Finding of the Court:
The Tahsildar acted without legal authority, violating judicial orders and improperly interfering with the HR & CE Department's jurisdiction over temple management. The court affirmed the HR & CE Department's authority and quashed the resolution from the peace committee meeting.
Issues: Whether the Tahsildar had the authority to convene a peace committee meeting regarding temple affairs and whether the subsequent decisions made by the Tahsildar were legally valid.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that state officials must act within their statutory powers. The Tahsildar's actions were deemed unauthorized interference in temple administration, undermining the authority of the HR & CE Department.
Final Decision: The resolutions made by the Tahsildar were quashed, and disciplinary actions were ordered against the involved officers.
COMMON ORDER
The writ petition in WP(MD)No.6505 of 2024 is filed by the petitioner seeking a mandamus for early disposal of the proceedings in O.A.No.5 of 2021 pending on the file of the Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department (in short 'HR & CE Department'), Madurai, with regard to framing of scheme for Arulmigu Mariamman Temple, Thiruthangal, Sivakasi.
2.The writ petition in WP(MD)No.7179 of 2024 is filed by the Fit Person of Arulmigu Mariamman Temple, Thiruthangal, Sivakasi, challenging the resolution dated 14.03.2024 passed in the Peace Committee Meeting headed by the Tahsildar, Sivakasi, with regard to the conduct of Temple festival.
3.Since both the writ petitions pertain to the affairs of Arulmigu Mariamman Temple, Thiruthangal, Sivakasi, they are heard together and are disposed of by way of this common order.
4.According to the petitioner in WP(MD)No.6505 of 2024, the subject Temple is managed by the Thiruthangal Eight Community Uravinmurai people, namely, Yathavar Kulam Community; Gowrava Kula Naidu Valiba Karpanantha Sangam Community; Keelatheru Pillaimar Community; Isai Velalar Community; Viswakarma Aintholilar Uravinmurai Community; Vaaniyar Kula Uravinmurai Community; Saiva Mudaliar and Saiva Pillaimar Community; and Melatheru Thevar Uravinmurai Community. However, there are some disputes and therefore, O.A.No.8 of 1998 was filed before the Joint Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Sivagangai, for framing a scheme. Accordingly, the scheme was framed on 09.06.2003. However, few communities felt that they have been left out and they have filed petitions to reopen the O.A. proceedings. Consequently, the proceedings has been re-opened and now, as per jurisdiction, it is pending before the Joint Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Madurai, in O.A.No.
5 of 2021.
5.The grievance of this petitioner is that though this Court, in WP(MD)No.23819 of 2023, dated 29.09.2023, has directed the Joint Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Madurai, to consider the same within a period of four weeks, the proceedings is still pending. Therefore, WP(MD)No.6505 of 2024 came to be filed for early disposal of O.A.No.5 of
2021.
6.It appears that several complaints have been filed raising allegations of misappropriation of temple money and it led to various litigations. In WP(MD)No.12185 of 2017, this Court has issued certain directions on 20.03.2019 for opening of Hundial. Alleging that though the Hundial was opened, the records and other articles were not handed over, WP(MD)No.10481 of 2019 came to be filed and this Court, by order dated 27.04.2019, allowed that writ petition. As against these orders, writ appeals came to be filed in WA(MD)Nos.589 & 686 of 2019 and a Division Bench of this Court, by common order dated 28.11.2022, directed the Joint Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Madurai, to pass orders based on the enquiry report of the Assistant Commissioner, in accordance with law. Based on this order, the Joint Commissioner has conducted enquiry and has passed final orders on 31.05.2023 directing the Assistant Commissioner to take steps to bring the subject Temple under the control of the Department and to appoint a Fit Person to the Temple. Accordingly, the Assistant Commissioner, by order dated 27.07.2023, appointed Fit Person to the Temple and the Fit Person has also taken charge.
7.Challenging the order passed by the Joint Commissioner dated
31.05.2023 and the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner dated 27.07.2023, a writ petition came to be filed in WP(MD)No.18938 of 2023. While entertaining that writ petition, this Court has passed an interim order permitting to file an appeal before the Commissioner, HR & CE Department, as against the order passed by the Joint Commissioner dated 31.05.2023. Finally, this Court, in WP(MD)No.18938 of 2023, dated
10.10.2023, has passed an order as under:-
“5. ... Since the petitioner has now challenged the order passed by the first respondent / Joint Commissioner dated 31.05.
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
