M/s. Sakkudi Sri Varadaraja Perumal Temple Trust, v. The Special Officer

Madras HC23 Apr 2019WP/1089/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Special Officer to inquire into the removal of temple idols and land encroachment. The Court found the idols were not stolen but held under lawful governmental custody, leading to the closure of the writ petition without granting directions.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition stands closed; no directions given; costs dismissed.

M/s. Sakkudi Sri Varadaraja Perumal… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 23.04.2019

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN

¶5

AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU

¶6

W.P.No.1089 of 2019

¶7

and

¶8

W.M.P.No.1226 of 2019

¶9

M/s.Sakkudi Sri Varadaraja Perumal Temple Trust, New No.16/1, 2nd Main Road, Kasturba Nagar, Adyar, Chennai-600 020, Represented by its Managing Trustee, Mr.J.Santhana Gopalan ...Petitioner

¶10

-Vs-

¶11

1.The Special Officer, Idol Wing, Criminal Investigation Department, SIDCO Old Corporate Building, First Floor, Garment Complex II, Thiru Vi Ka Ind. Estate, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. 2.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034. 3.The Commissioner, Department of Archaeology, Tamil Valarchi Valaagam, Thamizh Salai, Egmore, Chennai-600 008. 4.The Thasildhar, 6, RMS Road, Pandi Bazaar, Madurai East, Madurai, Tamil Nadu-625 001. 5. Mr.D.Pandi ..Respondents

¶12

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

¶13

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to enquire into the act of removal of the idols of Sri Varadaraja Perumal, Sri Devi, Bhudevi and Chakrathazhvar from the place of worship, encroachment of the temple land and to retrieve the same and to restore the idols to the petitioner herein in consultation with the second and third respondents to enable the petitioner to install the same at the reconstructed and renovated premises of Sri Varadaraja Perumal Temple at Sakkudi Village.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Umasuthan

¶15

For Respondent No.1 : Mr.K.Chellapandian,
Additional Advocate General
For Respondent No.2 : Mr.M.Maharaja,
Special Government Pleader
For Respondent No.3 : Mr.G.Karthikeyan,
Assistant Solicitor
General of India
For Respondent No.4 : Mr.J.Ramesh,
Additional Government Pleader
For Respondent No.5 : No Appearance
O R D E R
[Order of the Court was made by R.MAHADEVAN, J]

¶16

The petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petition seeking a Writ in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to enquire into the act of removal of the idols of Sri Varadaraja Perumal, Sri Devi, Bhudevi and Chakrathazhvar from the place of worship, encroachment of the temple land and to retrieve the same and to restore the idols to the petitioner herein in consultation with the second and third respondents, to enable the petitioner to install the same at the reconstructed and renovated premises of Sri Varadaraja Perumal Temple at Sakkudi Village.

¶17

Heard the submissions made on either side.

¶18

Alleging removal of the idols of Sri Varadaraja Perumal, Sri Devi, Bhudevi and Chakrathazhvar from the place of worship and encroachment of the temple land, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition for the relief as above.

¶19

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

¶20

However the first respondent filed a counter-affidavit,

¶21

wherein, at Paragraph No.5, it is stated as follows:

¶22

"It is respectfully submitted that there is no

¶23

offence of theft of idol as incorrectly claimed by the petitioner. Idols are safe in the lawful custody of the Government which are treasure trove finds. The question of deciding who has to construct the temple, how to construct and in which place to construct beyond the purview of investigation team appointed by the Hon'ble Court. The petitioner is not the legal owner but also just and rightful owner. Hence, I humbly prayed that suitable directions may be given to the District Collector, Madurai, the Commissioner, HR&CE and the Commissioner, Department of Archaeology."

¶24

In view of the fact that the idols have not been stolen

¶25

and are available with the Government, this Court is not inclined to give any direction, instead, recording the aforesaid statement made in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the first respondent, the Writ Petition stands closed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶26

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS IV)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1. The Special Officer,
Idol Wing, Criminal Investigation Department,
SIDCO Old Corporate Building,
First Floor, Garment Complex II,
Thiru Vi Ka Ind. Estate, Guindy,
Chennai-600 032.

¶27

The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034.

¶28

The Commissioner, Department of Archaeology, Tamil Valarchi Valaagam, Thamizh Salai, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.

¶29

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

¶30

The Thasildhar,

¶31

6, RMS Road, Pandi Bazaar, Madurai East, Madurai, Tamil Nadu-625 001.

¶32

+1cc to Mr.R.Umasuthan, Advocate, SR.No.39847 +1cc to the Govt.Pleader, Vide Sr.No.39887

¶33

W.P.No.1089 of 2019

¶34

Kak(21/06/2019)

¶35

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

M/s. Sakkudi Sri Varadaraja Perumal Temple Trust, v. The Special Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Sakkudi Sri Varadaraja Perumal Temple Trust, v. The Special Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Thiruvengambam Shivalaya Arakattalai, Vs The Inspector General of Police

Dheenadhayalan, Vs State of Tamilnadu

Kiran Velagapudi Vs the State Rep by Its

S.Srikumar Vs The Public Information Officer

The Commissioner, Vs The Director

The Commissioner Vs G.K.Subashchandiran