Anandavelu v. The Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29.09.2023 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU Anandavelu ..

Petitioner Vs.

1. The Union of India Rep. by the Secretary to Government Department of Hingu Religious Institutions & Wakf Government of Puducherry Puducherry.

2. The Commissioner Department of Hindu Religious Institution & Wakf Government of Puducherry Puducherry.

3. Arulmigu Sivasubramaniya Swami Devasthanam and Arulmigu Balamuthumarriamman Devasthanam Rep. by Trustees, Lawspet Puducherry.

..

Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of prohibition, restraining the respondents from appointing Board of Trustees, Special Officer and Executive Officer to the third respondent Temple against the order of this Court made in W.P.No.3241 of 2023 dated 30.06.2023.

For the Petitioner :

Mr.A.Rahul For the Respondents :

Mr.S.Raveekumar Government Pleader (Puducherry) for R1 & R2

ORDER

(Made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Heard Mr.A.Rahul, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.Raveekumar, learned Government Pleader (Puducherry) for respondents 1 & 2.

2. The writ petition appears to be premature. We asked the learned counsel the steps taken by respondents 1 and 2 to appoint the Board of Trustees, Special Officer and Executive Officer to the third respondent Temple. However, learned counsel says that as far as the third respondent Temple is concerned, no steps are undertaken. However, in respect of another Temple, the Executive Officer is directed to take over the administration of the said temple, which is in contravention of the order of this Court in W.P.Nos.34726 of 2022 & 3241 of 2023 dated 30.06.2023.

3. The writ petition is misconceived and misplaced. No action is

taken in respect of the third respondent Temple by the respondents 1 & 2. Such writ petition cannot be entertained. The petitioner claims to be a devotee of the third Respondent Temple, however, that does not enable the petitioner to file a frivolous petition without any cause of action.

4. In view of that, the writ petition stands dismissed with costs. Costs in cause.

(S.V.G., CJ.) (P.D.A., J.) 29.09.2023 Index :

Yes/No :

Yes/No drm To

1. The Secretary to Government The Union of India Department of Hingu Religious Institutions & Wakf Government of Puducherry Puducherry.

2. The Commissioner Department of Hindu Religious Institution & Wakf Government of Puducherry Puducherry.

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND P.D.AUDIKESAVALU, J.

(drm) 29.09.2023