When a statutory appeal is pending before a competent authority regarding temple management, the High Court may direct the expeditious disposal of the appeal while ensuring the status quo of the property's character is maintained.

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, calling for entire records pertaining to the order dated 26.7.2022 made in Se. Mu. Na. Ka. No. 2264 / 2022 / A3 passed by the 2nd respondent and notice dated 29.08.2022 of the 3rd Respondent and quash the same.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.V.Srikanth

For Respondent(s): Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan,

Special Govt. Pleader for R1 and R2

Mr.Wilson Topaz

for M/s.A.S.Kailasam & Associates

for R3

O R D E R

Challenge in the writ petition is to the order of the 3rd respondent dated 26.07.2022, in and by which, the 2nd respondent has called upon the petitioner to handover the charge of the subject temple and consequential notice of the 3rd respondent dated 29.08.2022.

2. The case of the petitioner is that his father Mr.N.Ramalinga Reddiar was the President of the Samajam and during the tenure of his father, the petitioner Samajam has approached the Joint Commissioner, HR &CE Department, Chennai and by virtue of the order dated 21.04.1999 of the Joint Commissioner, HR&CE Department, Chennai made in O.A.No.9/1997, the office of the Trusteeship in the temple has been declared as hereditary one. While such being the position, the petitioner received the impugned notice dated 29.08.2022, whereby, it transpired that the 2nd respondent has called upon the petitioner to handover the charge of the temple. Challenging the same, the present writ petition has been filed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that as against the order of the 1st respondent, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Commissioner, HR&CE Department and therefore, he would submit that it would be suffice, if this Court directs the Commissioner to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioner within a reasonable time.

4. However, learned counsel for the respondent would submit that during the pendency of the appeal, this Court may direct the petitioner not to change the character of the temple.

5. In the light of the above submissions, though the Commissioner, HR&CE Department is not a party to the writ petition, this Court directs the Commissioner to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. It is also made clear that the present impugned order is subject to the outcome of the order to be passed by the Commissioner, HR&CE Department in the pending appeal and till the disposal of the appeal by the Commissioner, HR&CE Department, interim order already granted is extended till then and the petitioner shall not alter the character of the Temple.

6. This Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.