When a claim for a hereditary priesthood or customary right in a religious institution is disputed, the appropriate remedy is to seek adjudication via a statutory application before the designated authority under the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, rather than via writ petition.

Prayer: Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 3rd Respondent to appoint the petitioner as the Poosari of Arulmigu Sri Malaiya Marungar Ayyanar Temple and Sri Urumanathar Temple situated at Perungalur, Pudukkottai District, while providing necessary security to perform the daily poojas without illegal interference base on the petitioners representation dated 27.12.2025 and pass such further or other orders as this Honble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of this case and thus render justice.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.G.Arun Kumar

For R1 and R2 : Mr.R.Parthiban

Government Standing Counsel

For R3 : Mr.G.Mathavan

ORDER

The writ petition is filed for a mandamus directing the 3rd respondent to appoint the petitioner as the Poosari of Arulmigu Sri Malaiya Marungar Ayyanar Temple and Sri Urumanathar Temple situated at Perungalur, Pudukkottai District, while providing necessary security to perform the daily poojas without illegal interference base on the petitioners representation dated 27.12.2025.

2. The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the petitioner's ancestors, his father, and thereafter the petitioner himself, have been exercising the customary right to perform poojas in the aforesaid temple. As a matter of fact, when a dispute arose earlier, the petitioner filed a civil suit in O.S. No. 8 of 2005, and a decree was passed in his favour on 03.03.2017 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Pudukottai. In these circumstances, the petitioner contends that he has suddenly been prevented from performing poojas in the temple, while third parties are being permitted to act as poojaris.

4. Upon hearing the learned counsel on either side, it can be seen that, in the earlier suit, the decree of permanent injunction restraining interference with the petitioner's poojariship was granted only as against defendants 1 and 2, who were private individuals. No order was passed against the temple or the authorities of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department. Therefore, when the petitioner claims a right to act as a poojari by virtue of a customary right, it is open to him to file an application under Section 63(e) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. Upon such application being filed, it is for the 1st respondent to consider the same and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law.

5. In view thereof, this writ petition is disposed of in the following terms:-

i. The petitioner shall file an application under Section 63(e) of the Tamil Nadu HR & CE Act, 1959 before the 1st respondent within a period of one week from the date of receipt or other web copy of the order.

ii. The same shall be dealt with as expeditiously as possible and final orders be passed after hearing all the necessary parties within a period of 18 weeks from the date of filing of the said application.

iii. The petitioner shall also array the temple concerned as the respondent in this application and also such other parties who are interested in opposing this application.

iv. No costs.

08.06.2026

Neutral Citation: No

rgm