Madras High CourtWP/32550/2023disposed of

T.S.Sankar v. The Principal Secretary Of Tamil Development And Hr And Ce,

2023-11-20Honourable The Chief Justice,Honourable Mr Justice D.Bharatha Chakravarthy6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 20.11.2023 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY T.S.Sankar ..

Petitioner Vs.

1. The Principal Secretary of Tamil development & HR & CE, Tamil Nadu.

2. The Commissioner Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Board Tamil Nadu.

3. The E.O/Joint Commissioner (HR&CE) Arulmigu Arunachaleshwarar Temple Tiruvannamalai.

4. The Collector Tiruvannamalai.

5. The Director National Monuments Authority 24, Thialk Marg, New Delhi - 1.

6. The Commissioner Department of Archaeology Tamil Valarchi Vallagam, Thamizh Salai Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.

7. The DGP/Director Fire and Rescue Services No.17, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road Egmore, Chennai - 8.

Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records in G.O.No.336 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same and consequently directing the first respondent to remove the construction put up in front of the East Raja Gopuram at Arulmigu Arunachaleeswarar Temple at Thiruvannamalai.

For the Petitioner : Ms.G.Uma Maheshwari For the Respondents : Mr.R.Shunmugasundaram Advocate General assisted by Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan Special Government Pleader (HR & CE) and Ms.A.G.Shakeena for R1 to R3 Mr.P.Muthukumar State Government Pleader for R4, R6 and R7

ORDER

(Made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Heard Ms.G.Uma Maheswari, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.R.Shunmugasundaram, learned Advocate General assisted by Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan, learned Special Government Pleader (HR & CE) and Ms.A.G.Shakeena, learned counsel for respondents 1 to 3 and Mr.P.Muthukumar, learned State Government Pleader for respondents 4, 6 and 7.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Coordinate Bench of this Court had stayed the construction, sought to be commenced under the Government Order impugned in the present writ petition.

3. When the same issue is the subject matter before the Coordinate Bench, it was not necessary for the petitioner to file the present public interest litigation. Even as per the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is not necessary to entertain the present public interest litigation.

4. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. There will be no order as to costs. Consequently, W.M.P.Nos.32151 and 32152 of 2023 are closed.

(S.V.G., CJ.) (D.B.C., J.) 20.11.2023 Index :

Yes/No :

Yes/No drm