JUDGMENT

Dr. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.

1. All these appeals have been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 15.9.2009 passed in Writ Appeal No.181 of 2009 by the High Court of Madras affirming the judgment and order dated 2.2.2009 of the learned Single Judge passed in Writ Petition No.18248 of 2006 rejecting the claim of the writ petitioner Podhu Dikshitars to administer the Temple.

1.1. In Civil Appeal No. 10620/2013, the appellant has raised the issue of violation of the constitutional rights protected under Article 26 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as Constitution) in relation to the claim by Podhu Dikshitars (Smarthi Brahmins) to administer the properties of the Temple in question dedicated to Lord Natraja. The same gains further importance as it also involves the genesis of such pre-existing rights even prior to the commencement of the Constitution and the extent of exercise of State control under the statutory provisions of The Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act 1951) as well as the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Act 1959).

1