IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr.Justice P.B. BALAJI
S.VIVEKANANDAN – Appellant
Versus
THE COMMISSIONER – Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11.11.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI
and
W.M.P. No.47335 of 2025
S.Vivekanandan
S/o.K.Santhanam,
No.47/11, Muniappa Nagar 1st Street,
Nerukundram, Chennai-600 107.
Vs
1. The Commissioner,
Tamilnadu Hindu Religious and
Charitable Endowments Department,
Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034.
2.The Joint Commissioner,
Tamilnadu Hindu Religious and
Charitable Endowments Department,
Kancheepuram.
3.The Assistant Commissioner, Tamilnadu Hindu Religious and
Charitable Endowments Department,
Chengalpattu.
4.The Executive Officer
Arulmigu Sri Vedhagiriswarar Temple,
Thirukazhukundram,
For Fit Person of Rajagopal Chettiar
Chathiram, Thirukazhukunram-603 109.
5.The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Varadharaja Perumal Thirukkoil, Kancheepuram.
6.The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Ekambaranathar Thirukkoil, Kancheepuram.
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to number and entertain the Revision petition filed by the petitioner herein dated 21.04.2025 and return the same in N.Dis.No.1632467/25/D2 dated 30.06.2025.
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.D.Rajagopal For Respondent(s) : Mr.K.Karthekeiyan
1 to 3 Government Advocate For Respondents(s) : Mr.R.Bharanidharan
4 to 6 Standing Counsel
ORDER
Heard Mr.D.Rajagopal, the learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. The petitioner claims to be the great grandson of one Rajagopal Chettiar who had executed a registered will dated 06.02.1950, registered as Document No.9 of 1950 in the Office of the Sub-Registrar,Walajabad, bequeathing his properties to legal heirs and also earmarking portions of the income from specific properties for performance of certain religious charities in three Temples namely Arulmigu Sri Vedhagiriswarar Temple at Thirukazhukundram, Sri Ekambaranathar Temple at Kancheepuram and Sri Varadharaja Swamy Temple at Kancheepuram. After the demise of said Rajagopal Chettiar, dispute arose and a person named Ramesh through the female line of succession filed a writ petition in W.P.No.26641 of 2012 claiming that properties of Rajagopal Chettiar in fact which were earmarked for performing religious charities, were not religious endowments. The writ petition was disposed of by this Court with a direction to the Joint Commissioner, HR & CE Department to determine the character of properties of late Rajagopal Chettiar under Section 63(c) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).
3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the writ petitioner did not disclose the other legal heirs and the beneficiaries of Rajagopal Chettiar under the registered will. The Joint Commissioner, subsequent to the order passed in the writ petition, proceeded to hold that the properties were religious endowments falling within the definition of the Act. The writ petitioner filed an appeal in A.P.No.22 of 2014 under Section 69 of the Act, however, the said appeal came to dismissed as abated with the death of said writ petitioner in the year 2014. It is thereafter, the 4th respondent has been appointed as Executive Officer of Arulmigu Sri Vedhagiriswarar Temple on 12.01.2023. On coming to know about the said appointment and the proceedings initiated in the earlier writ petitions, petitioner sought for copies of the earlier orders to enable him to file a regular appeal and pursue the remedy that was initially taken by the writ petitioner in A.P.No.22 of 2014, which was dismissed on account of the death of writ petitioner as dismissed as abated. However, the Joint Commissioner refused to give copies of earlier orders to the petitioner. Petitioner therefore challenged the order of Joint Commissioner under Section 21 invoking the revisional powers. The said revision petition was not numbered on account of delay in filing the revision and that too after appointing the 4th respondent as Executive Officer.
4. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner w
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.