R.Udhayakumar (Oor Gounder) v. Rasathi

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 25.07.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR in W.A.(MD)No.385 of 2022 1.R.Udhayakumar (Oor Gounder) 2.T.S.Thirumalai (Thalavi Gounder) 3.P.Raju (Nattuk Gounder) (Died)

...Petitioners/1 to 3 Respondents

Vs.

1.Rasathi ...1st Respondent/Appellant 2.The District Collector, Dindigul District.

3.The District Revenue Officer, Dindigul District.

4.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dindigul.

5.The Tahsildhar, Natham Taluk, Dindigul District.

6.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment , Dindigul.

7. The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment , Dindigul.

8.The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Thirumogur Kalamega Perumal Temple, 1/6

Madurai, As Incharge Kailasanathar Temple, Natham.

9.C.Saravanamuthu 10.S.Ajith Kumar 11.M.Suruli 12.Tamilvannan 13.Murugan 14.R.Chinnamuthu 15.Kalaiarasn 16.M.Ganesan 17.Senthil 18.K.Chandramuthu 19.K.Muthuraj

20. K.Lala Krishnan 21.Thangavel 22.Rajiv Gandhi 23.Murugan 24.V.Durai 25.V.Dhanagncheyan 26.S.Selvam 27.K.Suruli 28.Kannan 29.S.Poosaithurai 30.K.Mani (11 to 30 notice not necessary) ... 2 to 30 Respondents/4 to 32 Respondents PRAYER: Review Application is filed under Order 47 Rule 1 of C.P.C., to review the order passed in W.A.(MD).No.385 of 2022, dated 21.06.2022, on the file of the Court.

2/6

For Petitioners :

Mr.J.Britto Kanikairaj for M/s.H.Lakshmi Shankar For Respondents :

Mr.T.Pon Ramkumar for R1 Mr.S.P.Maharajan Special Government Pleader for R2 to R8 M/s.R.G.Shankar Ganesh for R9 and R10 R11 to R30 - Notice not necessary (vide EB under USR No.22088 of 2022) * * * * *

O R D E R

[Order of the Court was made by R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.] The present review application has been filed, seeking to review the order dated 21.06.2022 made in W.A(MD)No.385 of 2022. 2.The present review application has been filed on the alleged ground that certain observations have been made, which are contrary to the facts of the case.

3.A perusal of the order passed by this Court clearly reveals that the petitioners have sought for prayer as against the official respondents to appoint a Fit Person or an Adhoc Committee for the Management of the Temple. In the mean time, the Hereditary Trustee has been appointed. However, the 3/6

appointment of the Hereditary Trustee has not been challenged by the writ petitioners. In such circumstances, this Court has dismissed the Writ Appeal with liberty to the appellants to challenge the appointment of the Hereditary Trustee, if they are so advised. However, without availing the said remedy, the present Review Application has been filed. Therefore, we do not find any error apparent on the face of record. Accordingly, this Review Application stands dismissed. No costs.

[S.M.S., J.] [R.V., J.] 25.07.2025 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No NCC:Yes/No RJR 4/6

To 1.The District Collector, Dindigul District.

2.The District Revenue Officer, Dindigul District.

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dindigul.

4.The Tahsildhar, Natham Taluk, Dindigul District.

5.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment , Dindigul.

6. The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment , Dindigul.

7.The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Thirumogur Kalamega Perumal Temple, Madurai, As Incharge Kailasanathar Temple, Natham.

5/6

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

and R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.

RJR in W.A.(MD)No.385 of 2022 25.07.2025 6/6