Panneerselvam v. The Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 23-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI Panneerselvam S/o. Radhakrishnan, No.21 south street , Mullaivasal Village, Nidamangalam Taluk, Thiruvarur 614 404 ..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The Commissioner Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, No. 119 Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai 34.

2. The Assistant Commissioner 2 Mayiladuthurai Road, Thiruvarur 610 001

3. Venugopal S/o. Rajagopal Ponpoondar, Mullaivasal Village, Nidamangalam Taluk, Thiruvarur 614 404.

..Respondent(s) Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to consider the representation dated 27.10.2025 and direct the 2nd respondent to ensure that the 3rd respondent continues the customary practice of worship of the deity in the Arulmigu Aadhishakti Mullainayaki and Angala Parameswari temple Mullaivasal village, Nidamangalam Taluk.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.A.Mohamed Ismail For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Ravichandran, Additional Government Pleader (HR and CE) for R1 and R2 Order The petitioner has filed this petition to direct the 2nd respondent to consider the representation dated 27.10.2025 ensuring the 3rd respondent for continuous customary practice of worship of the deity in the Arulmigu Aadhishakti Mullainayaki and Angala Parameswari temple Mullaivasal village, Nidamangalam Taluk.

2. Case of the petitioner is that he is a resident of Mullaivasal village, Nidamangalamm Taluk and an ardent devotee of Arulmigu Aadhishakti Mullainayaki deity. The Temple was in a very bad condition without any maintenance and thereafter the devotees undertook renovation and performed Kudamuluku on 17.06.2024. Until such renovation, no individual had claimed any hereditary trusteeship, however, thereafter the 3rd respondent claimed to be the hereditary trustee and started interfering in the affairs of the said Temple and also shown high handedness by locking the doors of the temple, restricting the time of opening, demanding permission for devotees to enter the temple and thereby curtailed the long prevailing custom of worship in the said Temple. Despite requests made by the petitioner and other devotees not to interfere with the customary manner of pooja, the 3rd respondent did not respond. Hence, the

petitioner made representation to the 2nd respondent on 27.10.2025 and since no action is forthcoming, the petitioner is before this Court.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that it would suffice, if the second respondent is directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 27.10.2025 on merits and in accordance with law, within a specified period.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that the petitioner may not be restricted to worship the deity during the permissible time fixed by the HR and CE Department.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

6. In view of the limited request made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Court, permits the petitioner to visit the temple for offering worship and no one can restrict the petitioner to worship the deity during the permissible time fixed by the 1st respondent Department.

M.DHANDAPANI J.

sk

7. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

23-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order SK To

1. The Commissioner Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, No. 119 Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai 34

2. The Assistant Commissioner 2 Mayiladuthurai Road, Thiruvarur 610 001 23-03-2026