Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 63373

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.R.Swaminathan, J
S.Arul Mayer – Appellant
Versus
The Church of South India, Rep.by its General Secretary, CSI Synod Secretariat, CSI Centre, No.5, Whites Road, Royapettah, Chennai – 600 014. – Respondent
WP(MD)Nos.28202, 29598 and 29868 of 2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.V.Raghavachari, Senior Counsel for Mr.J.Kingsly Solomon, Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai for Mr.K.K.Udayakumar, Mr.Vineeth Subramani for Mr.P.P.Alwin Balan
For the Respondents:Mr.V.Prakash, Senior Counsel for M/s.Ajmal Associates for R1 and R2, Mr.N.Dilipkumar for R3, Mr.M.Lingadurai, Special Government Pleader for R4 and R5, Mr.T.Amjad Khan, Government Advocate for R7

Electoral processes within organizations governed by public duties are subject to judicial review to uphold fairness and protect rights, as established in this case.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ of Certiorari - The petitioners filed for quashing the orders issued by the Church of South India regarding the conduct of elections for the Diocesan council - The Full Bench decision held any act impacting elections is amenable to writ jurisdiction as implicated rights under Articles 21 and 21A - Court found the process for elections had already begun and maintained that such electoral integrity is essential and must be protected. (Paras 10-12)

(B) Writ jurisdiction - The court asserted the maintainability of writ petitions in relation to the management of educational institutions and their governance as they directly affect the rights of the petitioners - It also emphasized on fair electoral conduct being a judicial concern. (Paras 10, 17)

Facts of the case:
The case involves the conduct and management of elections for the Thoothukudi-Nazareth Diocese of the Church of South India and the challenge of actions taken that were found illegal and arbitrary, impacting the electoral process. The earlier Administrator had initiated the election process but subsequent judicial orders created challenges to its legitimacy. (Paras 2-6)

Findings of Court:
The court concluded that the impugned decisions by the Synod to interfere in the electoral process were without jurisdiction and the rights of the petitioners had been violated as they were elected unopposed based on the previously established process. (Paras 20-22)

Issues: The core issues involved whether the writ petitions were maintainable and the legitimacy of the impugned actions undertaken by the Synod. (Paras 9-10)

Ratio Decidendi: The court upheld the integrity of the electoral process, stating that any decisions impacting such processes should be subject to judicial review to ensure fairness; the prior Administrator's appointment was deemed valid since the electronic processes set forth were legitimate and had begun. (Paras 11-15)

Result: The writ petitions are allowed, and the previous orders by the Synod are quashed to continue with the election process under the appointed Administrator.

Table of Content
1. management elections must adhere to church governance rules. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. writ petitions challenging electoral processes are maintainable. (Para 9 , 10)
3. judicial protection is necessary for electoral integrity. (Para 20 , 21 , 22)

ORDER

The Church of South India was constituted by the Union, in 1947, of the Madras, Madura, Malabar, Jaffna, Kannada, Telugu and Travancore Church Councils of the South India United Church; the South India Province of the Methodist Church, comprising the Madras, Trichinopoly, Hyderabad and Mysore districts, and the dioceses of Madras, Dornakal, Tinnevelly and Travancore and Cochin in the Church of India, Burma and Ceylon. It is an unincorporated body governed by what is called as the CSI Constitution. Its assets are administered by CSI Trust Association (CSITA) which is a registered company.

2.The Tuticorin – Nazareth Diocese comprising 113 Pastorates and 548 Churches was originally a part of the Tirunelveli Diocese. Each diocese is governed by a diocesan council. The tenure of the previous diocesan council expired on 25.05.2024. Election for the next triennium had to be conducted. Rule 12A and 12D of Chapter VIII of the Constitution of the Church of South India, 2016 read as follows:

“12 A) The term of the Diocesan Council shall be three years. The Diocesan Constitution shall also state the month in which the term of the Council would normally begin, so that elections to the Diocesan Councils from the pastorates and other constituencies can be arranged accordingly. If for any reason the convening of the Council after fresh elections is delayed, such delay shall not prolong the life of the Council beyond the time stipulated in the constitution, subject to Clause (c) under this rule. The new council shall function only for the remainder of the term. (2015) ...

D) At least six months before the expiry of the term of the Council, the Executive Committee shall set in motion the arrangements for electing a new Council. In case the new Council cannot be convened within 3 months from the expiry of the term of the old Council, the Synod shall take step for the proper administration of the Diocese.(2015)” In the case on hand, such steps were not taken by the Executive Committee of the Diocesan Council. But Synod also could not intervene because during the relevant time, the affairs of the Synod were also locked in litigation. The Hon'ble Division Bench of the Madras High Court vide orders dated 27.02.2024 and 12.04.2024 had interfered with the election of the Synod office-bearers and also appointed a committee of administrators to conduct re-election. The administrators who were retired Judges of this Court sent more than one communication with regard to the affairs of CSI Tuticorin – Nazareth diocese. Those communications were put to challenge in C.S.No.225 of 2024 on the file of the Original Side of the Madras High Court by D.Neegar Prince Giftson (then Lay-Secretary ) and Rev.V.M.S.Tamil Selvan (then Vice Chairman).

3.In the said civil suit, injunction was originally granted and subsequently vacated. Aggrieved by the same, O.S.A.No.247 of 2024 was filed. The Hon'ble Division Bench appointed Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.Paul Vasanthakumar as Interim Administrator to manage the day-to- day affairs of the Diocese and to conduct election which is due for the Diocese. Since Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.Paul Vasanthakumar was unwilling to act as Administrator, vide order dated 10.01.2025, the Hon'ble Dr.Justice P.Jyothimani, a retired Judge of Madras High Court was substituted. It was a consent order. The Hon'ble Dr.Justice P.Jyothimani promptly initiated steps for holding the election and published the election schedule also. The process was to commence on 06.07.2025 and conclude on 13.11.2025. The Bishop of Coimbatore Diocese who was appointed as Moderator Commissary for CSI, Thoothukudi Nazareth Diocese by the Synod made a paper publication on 14.08.2025 assuring full cooperation for conducting the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 63373

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASG.R.Swaminathan, JS.Arul Mayer – AppellantVersusThe Church of South India, Rep.by its General Secretary, CSI Synod Secretariat, CSI Centre, No.5, Whites Road, Royapettah, Chennai – 600 014. – RespondentWP(MD)Nos.28202, 29598 and 29868 of 2025

Electoral processes within organizations governed by public duties are subject to judicial review to uphold fairness and protect rights, as established in this case.

Cases Referred (1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.R.Swaminathan, J
S.Arul Mayer – Appellant
Versus
The Church of South India, Rep.by its General Secretary, CSI Synod Secretariat, CSI Centre, No.5, Whites Road, Royapettah, Chennai – 600 014. – Respondent
WP(MD)Nos.28202, 29598 and 29868 of 2025