Tamil Kumaran v. The Joint Commissioner

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 08.04.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Tamil Kumaran ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Joint Commissioner, HR&CE Department, Sivagangai District.

2.The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Muthumari Amman Temple, Kottur, Devakottai Taluk, Sivagangai District.

...Respondents

Writ Petitions are filed under article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to appoint the petitioner and four others as trustees of Arulmigu Muthumari Amman Temple at Kottur on the basis of petitioner's application dated 03.12.2025, at the earliest.

For Petitioner :Mr.A.Balakrishnan For R1 :Mr.M.Sarangan Additional Government Pleader For R2 :Mr.VR.Shanmuganathan, Standing Counsel

ORDER

This writ petition is filed for a mandamus directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner and four others as trustees of Arulmigu Muthu Mariamman Temple at Kottur, on the basis of the petitioner's application dated 03.12.2025 at the earliest.

2.According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, there is a scheme that is governing the Temple and as per the scheme, the petitioner has been selected. But however, the appointment is not made. 3.When the matter came up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the temple would submit that there is a subsisting lease in favour of the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner is disqualified to be appointed as the trustee of the temple. The learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to deny the said factual position. 4.In view thereof, the prayer in the writ petition cannot be countenanced and as such, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. 08.04.2026 NCC:Yes/No

To 1.The Joint Commissioner, HR&CE Department, Sivagangai District.

2.The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Muthumari Amman Temple, Kottur, Devakottai Taluk, Sivagangai District.

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

Ns 08.04.2026