Senthil Kumar v. The Joint Commissioner

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 09.06.2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Senthilkumar .. Petitioner - Vs. - - 1.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Tiruchirappalli District.

2.The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Perambalur, Tiruchirappalli District.

.. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider and dispose the petitioner's application dated 09.12.2025 on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 13.04.2026. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Pozhilan For Respondents : Mr.R.Parthiban Government Standing Counsel for R1 & R2 Mr.Ramesh Mahadev Counsel for Temple 1/4

ORDER

The Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus directing the respondents to consider and dispose of the petitioner's application dated 09.12.2025, based on the petitioner's representation dated 13.04.2026.

2. The case of the petitioner is that eventhough the petitioner made an application pursuant to the call for made by the authorities, till date, the same has not been decided and the same is kept pending.

3. When the matter came up for hearing, the learned Government Standing Counsel appearing on behalf the respondents submitted that it is true that the petitioner made an application, but, considering the criminal case against the petitioner, the application of the petitioner is not being considered.

4. Mr. Ramesh Mahadev, learned counsel trying to intervene on behalf of the Executive Officer of the temple, submitted that the petitioner has four cases in crime Nos.398 of 2025, 271 of 2025, 85 of 2025 and 386 of 2025.

2/4

5. I have considered the rival submissions made on either side and perused the material records of the case.

6. When the petitioner applied for the office of the temple trusteeship, it is submitted that the second respondent considered the same, and the application was not approved in view of the pending criminal case. Since it is submitted that other applications have also been received, let all the applications be taken up and orders, in accordance with law, be passed. The reasons for rejecting the application of the petitioner shall also be communicated in writing, and it will be open for the petitioner to challenge the same in the manner known to law. It is made clear that if none of the applications are found to be suitable, a fresh notification calling for applications shall also be published. The aforesaid exercise of consideration of the applications and passing final orders shall be concluded within a period of three months from today.

7. Recording the above, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. 09.06.2026 sji NCC: Yes/No 3/4

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

sji To 1.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Tiruchirappalli District.

2.The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Perambalur, Tiruchirappalli District.

09.06.2026 4/4