Chinaiah Pa v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 21.04.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH P.A.Chinaiah : Petitioner Vs.
1. The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dindigul District, Dindigul.
3. The Tahsildar, Dindigul East Taluk Office, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District.
4. The Joint Commissioner, Tamilnadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Dindigul.
5. The Assistant Commissioner, Tamilnadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Dindigul.
6. The Inspector, Srinivasa Perumal Thirukovil, Tamilnadu Hindu Religious and 1/7
Charitable Endowment Department, Dindigul.
7. The Fit Person, Arulmigu Suyambu Sri Kathir Narasinga Perumal Temple, Pillama Naickan Patty, No.59, Periya Kottai Village, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District.
: Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from interfering with their management of the Temples and conducting the Temple Festivals with regard to Arulmigu Sri Kathir Narasinga Perumal Temple and Arulmigu Sri Vinayagar Temple are situated in Survey No. 323, 324 and 325 at Periyakottai Village, Pillamanaicken Patti, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District based on the petitioner's representation dated 05.02.2025.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Gomathisankar For Respondents : Mr.K.S.Selvaganesan Addl. Government Pleader for R1 to R6
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to forbear the respondents from interfering with their management of the Temples and conducting the Temple Festivals with 2/7
regard to Arulmigu Sri Kathir Narasinga Perumal Temple and Arulmigu Sri Vinayagar Temple are situated in Survey Nos.323, 324 and 325 at Periyakottai Village, Pillamanaicken Patti, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District, based on the petitioner's representation dated 05.02.2025.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. Having regard to the nature of the order proposed to be passed in this writ petition, notice to the seventh respondent is dispensed with.
3. The petitioner alleges that the seventh respondent, who was appointed as the Fit Person of the petition-mentioned temple, has been restricting the petitioner and villagers from performing painting work in the temple. Consequently, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 05.02.2025 to the respondents 1 to 6, requesting them to prevent the seventh respondent from interfering with the temple's management. As no action has been taken, the petitioner has now filed the present writ petition.
3/7
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, it would suffice, if this Court issues a direction to the fourth respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders, within a time frame that may be stipulated by this court.
5. It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon him to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. As such, non-consideration of the representation by the Statutory Authority would amount to dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and direct them to consider the same within a stipulated time.
6. In the light of the above observations, there shall be a direction to the fourth respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.02.2025, on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, as well as all other persons, who may be interested in the 4/7
subject matter, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is also made clear that this Court has not expressed any of its views with regard to the merits of the matter and that it is open to the fourth respondent to consider the same on its own merits.
7. With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
21.04.2025 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No PKN 5/7
To
1. The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dindigul District, Dindigul.
3. The Tahsildar, Dindigul East Taluk Office, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District.
4. The Joint Commissioner, Tamilnadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Dindigul.
5. The Assistant Commissioner, Tamilnadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Dindigul.
6. The Inspector, Srinivasa Perumal Thirukovil, Tamilnadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Dindigul.
6/7
VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.
PKN W.P.(MD) No.10625 of 2025 21.04.2025 7/7