##PAGE1##

WP No. 11335 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 25-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

WP No. 11335 of 2024 and WMP.Nos.12427 & 12430 of 2024

S.Soundarrajan

..Petitioner Vs

1. The Commissioner Hindu Religious And Charitable Endowment

Department, Nungambakkam, Chennai-5.

2. The Joint Commissioner Hindu Religious And Charitable Endowment

Department, Vellore.

3. The Assistant Commissioner Hindu Religious And Charitable Endowment

Department, Vellore.

4. The District Collector Collectorate, Ranipet District, Ranipet.

5. The Inspector Hindu Religious And Charitable Endowment

Department, Arakkonam, Ranipet District.

6. The Executive Officer Arulmigu Thirukkukeshwar Temple,

Pallur Village And Post, Arakkonam Taluk,

__________

Page1 of 7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/05/2026 01:42:50 pm )

WP No. 11335 of 2024

Ranipet District.

7. Mr.C.Velayutham

8. Mr.Thirunavukarasu

9. Smt. Papitha Sunil

10.Mr.Baskar

11.Mr.Mani

..Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for entire records pertains to order of 2nd Respondent in Na.Ka. Enn.3492-16/ 2023/A2 / dated 01-03- 2024 and quash the same as illegal and further direct the 2nd Respondent to appoint petitioner as non hereditary trustee of Arulmighu

Thirukugeshwarar temple, pallur village, Arakkonam Taluk, Ranipet District.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.A.Gouthaman

For Respondent(s): Mr.T.Raghunathan for M/s.T.S.Gopalan & Co.

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed to quash the entire records pertains to order of second respondent in Na.Ka. Enn.3492-16/ 2023/A2 / dated 01-03- 2024 and to direct the 2nd Respondent to appoint petitioner as non hereditary trustee of

__________

Page2 of 7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/05/2026 01:42:50 pm )

WP No. 11335 of 2024

Arulmighu Thirukugeshwarar temple, pallur village, Arakkonam Taluk, Ranipet District.

2. The facts of the case are as follows:

Based on the advertisement issued by the second respondent, the petitioner applied for the appointment as a non hereditary trustee to the Temple. The second respondent considered the petitioner’s application and called him for a personal enquiry. The petitioner appeared before the second respondent with all relevant documents and the second respondent also intimated him that he was one of the eligible persons. However, the second respondent suddenly appointed respondents 6 to 10 as trustees without following the procedure contemplated

under the HR & CE Act. Hence, the present writ petition.

3. The learned Government Advocate (HR & CE) submitted that during pendency of the writ petition, the duty period of the selected trustees has already expired and came to an end on 31.02.2026. Therefore, nothing survives for

adjudication in the present writ petition.

4. It is evidence from the submission of the learned Government Counsel that the very subject matter of the writ petition viz., the term of the trustees appointed vide the impugned order, has come to an end during the pendency of

the proceedings.

__________

Page3 of 7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/05/2026 01:42:50 pm )

WP No. 11335 of 2024

5 Once the tenure of the trustees has expired, the cause of action for quashing the impugned order does not survive for adjudication. The writ

petition has thus become infructuous.

6. However, this does not foreclose the petitioner’s right to challenge any future illegalities or to seek appropriate remedy if similar actions are repeated.

The petitioner is at liberty to work out his remedy in the manner known to law.

7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to work out his remedy in the manner known to law, if so advised and if any fresh cause of action arises. Consequently, connected

miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.

25-03-2026 rli

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order

Neutral Citation: Yes/No

__