Dismissed

P. Rajendran, v. the Secy. to Govt.

Madras HC10 Jul 2017WA(MD)/678/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court disposed of a writ appeal challenging a notice of proposed eviction. The Court held the appeal was premature as the Authority under Section 78 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act must proceed and pass orders after following due process of law.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Appeal of P.Rajendran was dismissed with the observation that the challenge to the impugned order was merely premature.

P. Rajendran, Vs the Secy. to Govt. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 10.07.2017

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

¶7

WA(MD)No.678 of 2014 and

¶8

M.P.(MD)Nos. 1 & 2 of 2014

¶9

P.Rajendran

¶10

: Petitioner

¶11

1.The Secretary,

¶12

Ministry of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Administrative Department, St.George fort, Chennai.

¶13

2.The Principal Secretary and Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Administrative Department, Nungampakkam High Road, Chennai.

¶14

3.The Joint Commissioner,

¶15

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Administrative Department, Sivagangai.

¶16

4.The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Administrative Department, Virudhunagar.

¶17

5.The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Natchiar(Andal) Thirukoil, Srivilliputhur. : Respondents

¶18

PRAYER : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act, praying to set aside the order dated 28.03.2014 made in W.P.(MD) No.12856 of 2013 on the file of this Hon'ble Court and allow the Writ Appeal.

¶19

Prayer in WP(MD). 12856/ 2013 :

¶20

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court To issue a writ of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Certiorarified mandamus calling for the entire records Se.A.Nade Na.Ga. NO. 163/2013 a 5 dated 11.07.2013 issued by the 5th

¶21

¶22

respondent and quash the same and forbear the respondents from evicting the petitioner from his respective residence in 14/4, Natchiyar south mada street, srivilliputhur.

¶23

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Ramasamy

¶24

For Respondents 1 to 4 : Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan Special Government Pleader For Respondent No.5 : Mr.S.Manohar.

¶25

O R D E R

¶26

[Order of the Court was made by M.M.SUNDRESH, J. ]

¶27

We do not find any merit in this Writ Appeal. What is challenged in the impugned order before the learned Single Judge, was a notice indicating the proposed action, in view of the failure of the appellant to comply with the mandate.

¶28

2.The learned Single Judge has rightly held that the action would follow under Section 78 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 [for brevity, “the Act”], though the observation is not correct in directing the appellant to go before the Authority under Section 78 of the Act, as it is for the said Authority, to proceed and pass appropriate orders by following the due process of law. Therefore, we are of the view that the challenge made to the impugned order is only pre-mature.

¶29

3.Accordingly, this Writ Appeal stands disposed of, with the above said observation.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

Assistant Registrar(AD-II)

¶32

/True Copy/

¶33

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶34

¶35

1.The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Ministry of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Administrative Department,

¶36

St.George fort, Chennai.

¶37

2.The Principal Secretary and Commissioner to Government of Tamil Nadu,

¶38

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Administrative Department, Nungampakkam High Road, Chennai.

¶39

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.The Joint Commissioner,

¶40

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Administrative Department, Sivagangai.

¶41

¶42

4.The Assistant Commissioner,

¶43

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Administrative Department, Virudhunagar.

¶44

5.The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Natchiar(Andal) Thirukoil, Srivilliputhur.

¶45

+1cc to Special Government Pleader, SR.No. 64594 +1cc to M/S.S.Manohar, Advocate SR.No. 64684

¶46

+1cc to M/S.R.Ramasamy, Advocate SR.No. 64743

¶47

WA(MD)No.678 of 2014 and M.P.(MD)Nos. 1 & 2 of 2014 10.07.2017

¶48

MR/RMK

¶49

JM/SKN RSK/SAR 2/24.07.2017/3P/9C

¶50

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

P. Rajendran, v. the Secy. to Govt.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P. Rajendran, v. the Secy. to Govt.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Arivazhagan Vs the Deputy Superintendent of

V.Malaiyalagu Vs the Commissioner of Police

Palavesam Vs the Principal Secretary to

C.Vairamuthu, Vs the Secretary

C. Jayapaul Vs the Commissioner of Police

N. Palanichamy Vs the Superintendent of Police