Remanded

Baskar K v. the District Collector

Madras HC23 Feb 2022WP(MD)/3470/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court disposed of the matter without expressing an opinion on merits. The petitioner was directed to file a representation to the District Collector regarding a plea that the Malaiyakaruppar Temple falls outside the HR&CE Act. The Collector was instructed to consider the third respondent.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to file representation to the 1st Respondent within 15 days; the 3rd Respondent shall be heard before the 1st Respondent passes orders.

Baskar K Vs the District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P(MD).No.3470 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 23.02.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶6

W.P(MD).No.3470 of 2022 and W.M.P.(MD).No. 3041 of 2022

K.Baskar

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Podukottai District.

¶11

2.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, 119, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Thousand Lights West, Nungambakkam, Chennai.

¶12

3.The Executive Officer, Pudukottai Devasthanam, Near Victobe Temple, Pallavankulam, Vedakarai, Pudukottai ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 3^rd Respondent in Na.Ka.No.109/2021P dated 22.07.2021 and quash the same.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.R. Balakrishnan For R1 & R2 : Mr.P.Subbaraj Special Government Pleader

¶14

ORDER

¶15

After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents, this writ petition is disposed of at the time of admission without expressing any opinion on merits by directing the petitioner to file appropriate application before the first respondent to consider the petitioner's plea that Arulmigu Sri Malaiyakaruppar Temple situated in Survey No.152, Kovilpatti, Nathampannai Village, Pudukottai Taluk and Pudukottai District does not fall within the purview of the HR&CE Act in the light of the averments of the third respondent in O.S.No.276 of 1997, which was https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

1/3

¶17

W.P(MD).No.3470 of 2022

¶18

pending before the District Munsif Court at Pudukottai. The petitioner may approach the first respondent within a period of fifteen days from the day of receipt of copy of this order and if such representation is given, the first respondent shall consider and pass orders as to whether the claim of the petitioner is correct or not. Needless to state before passing such order, the third respondent shall also be heard who appears to have issued notice dated 22.07.2021, tends to take action against the petitioner for not obtaining appropriate permission. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶19

¶20

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶21

¶22

1.The District Collector, Podukottai District.

¶23

2.The Commissioner,

¶24

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, 119, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Thousand Lights West, Nungambakkam, Chennai.

¶25

3.The Executive Officer, Pudukottai Devasthanam, Near Victobe Temple, Pallavankulam, Vedakarai, Pudukottai.

¶26

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

¶27

2/3

¶28

W.P(MD).No.3470 of 2022

¶29

+1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-8348[F] dated 24/02/2022 )

¶30

ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD).No.3470 of 2022 23.02.2022

¶31

PP(12.03.2022) 3P 5C

¶32

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

¶33

3/3

Baskar K v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baskar K v. the District Collector

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

K.Mahalingam Vs the Commissioner

Mr.P.Muthukumar, Vs the Joint Commissioner

Peer Mohammed Vs the Commissioner

Elambarithi Vs the Commissioner

Nagarajan .P Vs the Joint Commissioner

Muthukrishnan.M.R Vs the Commissioner