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) 73387

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr.Justice P.B. BALAJI
KASTURBA GANDHI MATRICULATION HIGHER SECONDARY SCH – Appellant
Versus
THE COMMISSIONER – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 17.11.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI and W.M.P.Nos. 43816 and 43817 of 2025 Kasturba Gandhi Matriculation Higher Secondary School, Represented by its Secretary, Mr.M.Inbaraj, 75-B, Durgalaya Road, Tiruvarur – 610002 ...Petitioner Vs

1. The Commissioner Hindu Religious And Charitable Endowments Department, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai -600 034.

2.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious And Charitable Endowments Department, ASN Colony, Melakottaivasal, Nagapattinam -611 001.

3.The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious And Charitable Endowments Department, Tiruvarur -610 001.

4.The Executive Officer, Arulmighu Thiyagarajaswamy Temple, Tiruvarur -610001.

...Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated 06.05.2025 in R.P.No. 568/2024 passed by the 1st respondent, quash the same as arbitrary and illegal, and consequently forbear the respondents, their subordinates and agents from in any manner interfering with the petitioner School's peaceful possession and functioning in the premises at 75-B, Durgalaya Road, Tiruvarur-610 002 until the final disposal of R.P.No. 568 of 2024 pending before the 1st respondent.

For Petitioner :Mr.Krishna Srinivasan, Senior Counsel for Mr.Vadiraj Anirudh S G For Respondents: Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan, Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

The Writ Petition is filed to call for the records relating to the impugned order dated 06.05.2025 in R.P.No. 568/2024 passed by the 1st respondent and quash the same as arbitrary and illegal, and also consequently to forbear the respondents from in any manner interfering with the petitioner's peaceful possession and functioning in the premises at 75-B, Durgalaya Road, Tiruvarur-610 002, till the final disposal of R.P.No. 568 of 2024 pending before the 1st respondent. 2. Heard Mr.Krishna Srinivasan, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Mr.Vadiraj Anirudh S G, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

3.This Court, by order dated 15.10.2025, had directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- on or before 17.11.2025 and also to surrender an extent of 53,268 sq.ft after 22.10.2025 but before

25.10.2025.

4.The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that both the conditions have been complied with, in time, without seeking seeking any further extension. It is recorded even in the order dated 15.10.2025 that the petitioner School retained an extent of 25,000 sq.ft. for the functioning of the school. The learned senior counsel, referring to the rough sketch produced today, submitted that the playground area of an extent of 15,000 sq.ft is necessary for effective running of the school, as otherwise the School will not have any space or playground for the students. He would further submit that the 1st respondent may consider the request of the petitioner for leasing out the said 15,000 sq.ft for use as a play ground for the school and that the petitioner is also willing to agree to the terms that may be set out for such lease, in accordance with law.

5. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the order which is under challenge arises out of proceedings under Section 78 and that a revision is pending under Section 21 of the H.R & C.E when the interim order came to be passed, directing the entire arrears of Rs.1,65,92,312/- to be paid in three installments. It is aggrieved by the said order that the present writ petition has been filed. He would further submit that since the revision is pending, it would be appropriate for the 1st respondent to decide as to whether the request of the petitioner for leasing out the 15,000 sq.ft for use of the petitioner-school as a playground can be conside

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