In a writ petition, the petitioner sought a direction for the authorities to act on a representation alleging that a respondent was trying to alienate temple property. The Single Judge held that the civil court must decide the disputed heirship rights and dismissed the petition, observing that the matter involved a pending suit for declaration.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.No.536 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.12.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
W.P.No. 536 of 2022
G.Doraisamy
.. Petitioner
Vs.
.. Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent herein to
1/6
W.P.No.536 of 2022
complete the process of enquiry and pass orders in respect of the jewels and
the properties of the temple namely Arulmighu Venugopalaswamy Thirukoil, Kiliyagoundanpalayam, Pooluvapatti Village, Perur Taluk, Coimbatore District, based upon the representation of the petitioner dated 16.08.2021.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.R.M.Palaniappan for Mr.P.Muthukumaraswamy
For Respondents 1 to 3 : Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan Spl.G.P.(HR & CE) For Respondent 4 : Mr.R.Bharanidharan For Respondent 5 : Mr.N.Manokaran
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 16.08.2021.
right in the property but he is trying to alienate the property of the temple, therefore he sent a representation to the second respondent but no action has
been taken.
2/6
W.P.No.536 of 2022
that various suits are pending between the parties and he filed a suit to declare him as the legal heir of hereditary trustee and the same is also pending before the District Court, Coimbatore. Further, it is his contention that the representation of the petitioner dated 16.08.2021 has already been considered by the second respondent and orders has also been passed on 31.08.2021. Hence seeks dismissal of the writ petition.
W.P.No.536 of 2022
16.08.2021 has been forwarded to the second respondent and he has also considered the representation and recorded that all the disputes are pending between the parties and though it is recorded that the 5th respondent has no right in the temple, it is also recorded that suit for declaration is pending wherein the temple is also a party.
12.12.2022
Index : Yes / No kk
To
4/6
W.P.No.536 of 2022
5/6
W.P.No.536 of 2022
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.
kk
W.P.No.536 of 2022
12.12.2022
6/6
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can direct the authorities to act on a representation regarding temple property when a civil suit for declaration of heirship is pending.
Whether the dispute over the rights of the petitioner and the fifth respondent to the temple property can be decided in this writ petition.
G. Doraisamy
Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department
A. R. Venugopal
N. Sathish Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
