Sri Sakthi Periyamariamman Temple v. The Assistant Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 03.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI W.P. No.5976 of 2024 and WMP. No.6632 of 2024 Sri Sakthi Periyamariamman Temple, Represented by its Secretary P.Arjunan, Thangapuripattinam, Mettur Dam, Salem District.

Petitioner Vs 1.The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious Charitable & Endowment Department, Kottai Mariamman Thirukovil Office, Salem.

2.The Executive Officer, Hindu Religious Charitable & Endowment Department, Arulmigu Sokkanathar Thirukovil, Mettur Town and Taluk, Salem District.

3.T.M.Sendilkumarr (impleaded as third respondent as per order dated 11.07.2024).

Respondents PRAYER: This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents and their authorities not to interfere with the peaceful administration of the petitioner's temple without due process of law. 1/4

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Nalliyappan For Respondents : Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan, Special Government Pleader

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner to direct the respondents and their authorities not to interfere with the peaceful administration of the petitioner's Temple without due process of law.

2. Mr.Nalliyappan, learned counsel for the petitioner invites my attention to the order passed on 08.07.2025 in WP.No.24495 of 2025, where the present writ petitioner came before this Court by way of subsequent writ petition, however, seeking the very same relief, viz., to forebear the respondents from disturbing the petitioner's peaceful administration of the Temple in the guise of the proceedings of the first respondent in G.O.(Pa) No.223 dated 16.05.2025.

3. This Court after recording the written instructions received by the learned Additional Government Pleader, held as follows: "5. On carefully considering the submissions made on either side and the materials available on record and also considering the written instructions given by the second respondent, it is seen that the appointment of non-hereditary trustees pertained to Arulmigu Thangamalai Periyamariamman Temple, Mettur. There is similarity in the names since the name of the petitioner temple is Arulmigu Sri Sakthi Periyamariamman Temple. Therefore, the grievance of the petitioner is that an attempt is 2/4

being made by non-hereditary trustees to interfere with the affairs of the temple. The written instructions makes it clear that the appointment of the non-hereditary trustees is only to manage and administer the Arulmigu Thangamalai Periyamariamman Temple, Mettur. That apart, steps are also being taken to question the registration of the name of the petitioner as Sri Sakthi Periyamariamman Temple.

6. In the light of the above stand taken by the respondents, the grievance expressed by the petitioner is sufficiently answered. If the respondents are questioning the registration of the name of the petitioner before the concerned District Registrar under the Societies Registration Act, it has to be independently worked out in the manner known to law."

4. In the light of the order passed in the above Writ Petition, I do not see any necessity to decide the present writ petition which was filed earlier, for the same relief. Recording the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs. 03.11.2025 rkp To 1.The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious Charitable & Endowment Department, Kottai Mariamman Thirukovil Office, Salem.

2.The Executive Officer, Hindu Religious Charitable & Endowment Department, Arulmigu Sokkanathar Thirukovil, Mettur Town and Taluk, Salem District.

P.B.BALAJI.J., 3/4

rkp W.P. No.5976 of 2024 and WMP. No.6632 of 2024 03.11.2025 4/4