JUDGMENT :

M. JOTHIRAMAN, J.

Under assail is the order passed in WP.(MD)No.16043 of 2025 dated 17.02.2026.

2.Originally, the appellant/writ petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department in R.P.No.1 of 2025/D2 . It is the case of the appellant that his grand-father, Sankarakuthala Bhattar had 1 ¼ days pooja murai in the pooja turn that runs between 18^th day to 20^th day of every Tamil month in the fourth respondent temple. In 1948, the said Sankarakuthala Bhattar fell in ill and since the appellant's father was a minor by that time, the appellant's grandfather as a stop gap arrangement had given a leave vacancy request to permit his cognate Krishna Bhattar to perform the pooja murai. In 1952, for some misdeeds, said Krishna Bhattar was suspended. He had son by name Kalyana Appaswamybhattar, who is the father of the sixth respondent. After suspension of Krishna Bhattar in 1952, another cognate of appellant's grandfather was doing the pooja murai. After the death of the appellant's grandfather, the said Kalyana Appaswamybhattar filed a suit in O.S.No. 297 of 1969 on the file of the District Munsif, Srivaikuntam seeking declaration that he is entitled to hereditary right to perform the pooja murai. By a judgment and decree dated 08.12.1971, the said suit was dismissed after holding that the appellant's father is entitled to 1 ¼ day murai. The said judgment was implemented by the temple and the appellant's father was doing pooja murai till 2007. One Alagammal, W/o.Krishna Bhattar and grandmother of the sixth respondent made a request with the temple to provide the pooja murai to her grandson, the sixth respondent herein, which was rejected by the temple administration on 28.08.2007 and the same was challenged by the said Alagammal in WP.(MD)No.7624 of 2007 and the said case was dismissed on 14.07.2009. Again, the sixth respondent had challenged the same proceedings in WP.(MD)No.6093 of 2009 and the said writ petition was also dismissed on 20.01.2011 with liberty to file a civil suit.

2.1.The sixth respondent had filed suit in O.S.No.47 of 2011 before the District Munsif, Tiruchendur. Later, the then temple administration had entered into some understanding and based on the same, the said suit was not pressed, on 23.02.2012. The temple administration issued a proceedings dated 23.02.2012 giving 1 ¼ days pooja murai to the sixth respondent. Aggrieved over the same, the appellant had filed a writ petition in WP.(MD)No.2298 of 2012 and the same was disposed of by an order dated 08.03.2012 relegating the appellant to the appellate authority. Accordingly, the appellant filed R.P.No.16/2022/D2 before the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department. By an order dated 16.11.2012, the appellant was directed to file an appeal under Section 55(4) of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act [hereinafter referred as 'the Act']. Accordingly, the appellant filed the appeal in A.P.No.1 of 2013 before the Joint Commissioner, Tirunelveli and by an order dated 23.01.2013 in I.A.No.1 of 2013, the Joint Commissioner granted stay. Aggrieved by the interim order, the sixth respondent filed R.P.No.64 of 2013/D2 before the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department and the same was dismissed with a direction to the Joint Commissioner to dispose the appeal in A.P.No.1 of 2013.

2.2.The sixth respondent challenged the said order in WP.No. 21153 of 2013 and this Court interim stay of further proceedings in A.P.No.1 of 2013, on 01.08.2013. The appellant was permitted to do pooja. To that effect, proceedings came to be issued on 01.09.2013. Aggrieved over the same, the sixth respondent has filed R.P.No.100 of 2013 before the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department and the same was disposed of vide order dated 12.05.2014. Aggrieved over the same, the appellant had filed a writ petition in WP.No.24209 of 2014 and the sa