Petition challenged the appointment of a fit person for a Mutt via writ petition under Article 226. Court held that Amendment 6(18) included samadhis within the definition of religious institution, validating the appointment against an 1954 order. Writ dismissed.
Writ Petition dismissed; connected Miscellaneous Petitions closed; No costs.
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(MD). No. 6890 of 2019
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 15.12.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.D. AUDIKESAVALU
W.P(MD). No. 6890 of 2019 and W.M.P(MD) Nos. 5495 and 5496 of 2019
... Petitioners
-vs-
... Respondents
1/6
W.P(MD). No. 6890 of 2019
Prayer:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the Second Respondent in Se.Mu.Na.ka.No.9086/2018 Aa1, dated 09.02.2019, quash the same as illegal.
For Petitioners : Mr. V.R.Shanmuganathan For Respondents : Mr. P.Subbaraj Special Government Pleader for R1 to R3 Dr.C.Guhaseelarupan for R4 Mr. A.Balamurugan for R5
O R D E R
Heard Mr. V.R.Shanmuganathan, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. P.Subbaraj, Learned Special Government Pleader for the First and Second Respondents, Dr. C.Guhaseelarupan, Learned Counsel for the Fourth Respondent and Mr. A.Balamurugan, Learned Counsel for the Fifth Respondent and perused the materials placed on record, apart from the pleadings of the parties.
2/6
W.P(MD). No. 6890 of 2019
Thiruvedagam, Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District, has been appointed as Fit Person of Eliagurusamy Mutt (hereinafter referred to as 'Institution' for short) at Thenoor Village, Vadipatti Madurai North Taluk, Madurai District.
3/6
W.P(MD). No. 6890 of 2019
of the HR&CE Act with effect from 27.06.2012, which expressly covers 'samadhi' and as its consequence, the earlier order passed by the then Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (Admin.) Department which is inconsistent with the provisions of the HR&CE Act, cannot be relied by the Petitioner for exemption from the applicability of that Act from the date on which the said amendment came into force.
In fine, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. No costs.
15.12.2022
pkn
Index: Yes/No Note: Issue order copy by 30.01.2023.
To
4/6
W.P(MD). No. 6890 of 2019
5/6
W.P(MD). No. 6890 of 2019
P.D. AUDIKESAVALU, J.
pkn
W.P(MD). No. 6890 of 2019
15.12.2022
6/6
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the amendment to Section 6(18) of the HR&CE Act covering samadhis validates the appointment of a fit person for Eliagurusamy Mutt despite an earlier order holding it not a religious institutio
Whether the Writ Petition challenging the appointment order can be quashed as illegal under Article 226.
Whether the definition of religious institution under the HR&CE Act now includes samadhis unlike the 1951 Act.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
M.Sonaimuthu
M.Muthunayagam
The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (Admn.) Department
The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments (Admn.) Department
The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments (Admn.) Department
The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Edaganathaswamy Temple, Thiruvedagam
P.D. Audikeshavalu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
