Anitha.G v. The Commissioner

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 08.01.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI W.P(MD)No.31150 of 2023 and WMP(MD) Nos.26699 & 26700 of 2023 Anitha.G ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowment Department, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600034.

2.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowment Department, Tirupur District.

3.The Deputy Commissioner (Jewel Verification) Enquiry Officer, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowment Department, Mayiladuthurai District - 609003.

...Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned charge memo dated 25.05.2023 in Na.Ka.No. 6504/2023/A2 passed by the 1/5

2nd respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondent authorities to drop all further proceedings in pursuant to the charge memo dated 25.05.2023, within the time frame fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Rajakumar For Respondents : Mr.J.K.Jeyaseelan Government Advocate

O R D E R

The petitioner is working as a Grade II Executive Officer in Arulmigu Azhagirinadhar Swamy Temple, Salem. When she was working as an Executive Officer, Grade II in Ayyarmalai Arulmigu Rathnagirieshwarar Temple, Karur District, she was issued with a charge memo on 25.05.2023 on certain allegations and the same is under challenge in this writ petition. 2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the charge memo consists totally 15 charges and most of the charges are relating to financial accounts and loss of revenue to the temple, due to non-increment and non-fixation of fair rent for 2/5

the temple properties. According to the petitioner, there was no misappropriation of funds and though this petitioner has served as Executive Officer in the said temple only from 14.10.2022 to 10.05.2023 for a limited period, the charge memo was issued, under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules as against this petitioner in a vague manner. 3.This writ petition is filed challenging the charge memo issued as against this petitioner. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India Vs Kunisetty Satyanarayana, reported in 2006 SCC Vol.II, 28, has held that the charge memo or show cause notice shall not be interfered with by the orders of the Courts except lack of jurisdiction of the authority or if any malafides are attributed. In this case, no such plea has been taken by the petitioner. 4.In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed with liberty to this petitioner to raise all the grounds 3/5

raised in this writ petition in the enquiry proceedings. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petitions are closed. 08.01.2026 Index:Yes Internet:Yes vrn To 1.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowment Department, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600034.

2.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowment Department, Tirupur District.

3.The Deputy Commissioner (Jewel Verification) Enquiry Officer, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowment Department, Mayiladuthurai District - 609003.

4/5

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

vrn Order made in W.P(MD)No.31150 of 2023 and WMP(MD) Nos.26699 & 26700 of 2023 08.01.2026 5/5