V.Palani v. The Commissioner
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.09.2025 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. DHANDAPANI 1.V.Palani 2.S.Murugan 3.S.C.Dhanapani 4.R.Kathiravan 5.D.Elumalai 6.B.Rajamani 7.K.Annamalai 8.R.Elumalai 9.S.Madhu 10.V.Ravi ... Petitioners Vs.
1.The Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034.
2.The Joint Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Tirupathur.
3.The Joint Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Vellore.
4.The Assistant Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Tirupathur.
Page No.1 of 7
5.Thirumanmalai Tirumal Tirupani Paribalana Trust, its Managing Trustee, Mr.Varadharajan, Merkathiyankottai Village, Cimmanapudhur Post, Tirupathur Taluk & District - 635 652.
... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 3rd respondent to take action against the 5th respondent on the basis of the complaints given by the petitioners on 30.07.2025, 19.08.2025 and 06.09.2025 by modify in so far as the 5th respondent is concerned the order dated 11.11.2012 in O.A.No.10 of 2012 and appoint trustees to the Arulmigu Chennakesavaperumal Temple at Mankundrumalai by calling for applications from among the Public/Devotees without reference to the names sponsored by the 5th respondent and by continuing the Arulmigu Chennakesavaperumal Temple, Mankundrumalai under the Administrative Control of HR & CE Department. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Gnanasekar For Respondents : Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan Special Government Pleader [R1 to R4] Mr.R.Rajarajan [R5] *****
ORDER
The petitioners seek for a direction to the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department (in short ''HR & CE Department'') to consider their grievance with regard to the appointment of trustees in the temple, namely Arulmigu Chennakesavaperumal Temple. Page No.2 of 7
2. Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan, learned Special Government Pleader, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 4 and Mr.R.Rajarajan, learned counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the 2nd respondent. In view of the consent expressed by the parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.
3. According to the petitioners, the subject temple was constructed with the funds provided by the villagers about a century ago and the temple all along remained public temple. Later, the temple was taken over by the HR & CE Department. The 5th respondent trust was formed by the villagers with the sole objective of maintaining the temple. It is the grievance of the petitioners that the present managing trustee has appointed his relatives as trustees and a large scale of misappropriation of funds was happened. It is the further grievance of the petitioners that every time new trustees are appointed, the 5th respondent pushes the names of the persons, who are willing to dance to his tunes. The general public and villagers are never given an opportunity to take part in the selection process. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition before this Court for appropriate orders.
Page No.3 of 7
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and also perused the materials available on record.
5. Admittedly, the subject temple is a listed temple under the HR & CE Department and any appointment either as a Poojari or Trustee can be only by the HR & CE Department. Already, a scheme was framed in the year 2012 in O.A.No.10 of 2012 on the file of the Joint Commissioner, HR & CE Department. As per the scheme, the 5th respondent trust made an application for appointment of members of the trust as hereditary trustees of the temple. The grievance of the petitioners is that the trust have no right to administer the temple and the subject temple was constructed by the village people including the petitioners' forefathers. Therefore, they seek to modify the scheme framed in O.A.No.10 of 2012.
6. However, the grievance of the 5th respondent is that the 1st petitioner is a tenant under the temple and he is a defaulter in payment of lease amount to the HR & CE Department. Therefore, he has no right to find fault with the process of appointment of trustees. Page No.4 of 7
7. In view of the above, the official respondents are directed to conduct an enquiry as to whether the 1st petitioner is due in paying the lease amount in favour of the temple. If it is so, the official respondents shall collect the lease amount from the 1st petitioner and thereafter, entertain the application filed by the 1st petitioner for modification of the scheme.
8. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
23.09.2025 Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order sp To 1.The Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034.
2.The Joint Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Tirupathur.
Page No.5 of 7
M.DHANDAPANI, J.
sp 3.The Joint Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Vellore.
4.The Assistant Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Tirupathur.
23.09.2025 (2/2) Page No.6 of 7
W.M.P.No.40532 of 2025 in M.DHANDAPANI, J.
Though the present writ miscellaneous petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking to permit the petitioners to file a single writ petition joingly, it is pertinent to note that, the Registry has already made an endorsement in the main petition itself that, "full court fee paid".
2. In view of the above endorsement made by the Registry, this Writ Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
23.09.2025 sp (1⁄2) Page No.7 of 7