Dismissed

G.Murugesan, v. the Asst Commissioner

Madras HC12 Dec 2022WP(MD)/7134/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ of certiorari against an order of the First Respondent. Recognizing the availability of an effective alternative remedy under the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, the Court dismissed the petition as withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file revision under Section 21-A of the Act. Limitation period for revision shall exclude time for hearing of this Writ.

G.Murugesan, Vs the Asst Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P. (MD) No. 7134 of 2018

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 12.12.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.D. AUDIKESAVALU

¶6

W.P. (MD) No. 7134 of 2018 and W.M.P. (MD) No. 6870 of 2018

G.Murugesan

... Petitioner

-vs-

The Assistant Commissioner, Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Board, Madurai.

¶11

The Joint Commissioner, Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Board, Madurai.

¶12

The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Balathandayuthapani Swami Temple, Nethaji Road, Madurai.

¶13

Mr. Radha Krishnan

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

Prayer:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the entire records relating to the impugned order passed by the First Respondent vide his proceedings CHE.MU.NA.KA.No.949/2009/E3 dated 02.03.2018, quash the same.

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

1/4

¶18

W.P. (MD) No. 7134 of 2018

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr. M.Mahaboob Athiff For Respondents : Mr. P.Subbaraj Special Government Pleader for R1 & R2 Dr. C.Guhaseelarupan for R4 Mr. S.Kandasamy for R3

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

Heard Mr. M.Mahaboob Athiff, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. P.Subbaraj, Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the First and Second Respondents, Mr. S.Kandasamy, Learned Counsel for the Third Respondent and Dr. C.Guhaseelarupan, Learned Counsel for the Fourth Respondent, and perused the materials placed on record, apart from the pleadings of the parties.

¶22

When it was pointed out that the Petitioner has got an effective alternative remedy to challenge the proceedings in CHE.MU.NA.KA.No. 949/2009/E3 dated 02.03.2018 passed by the First Respondent, which is impugned in this Writ Petition, by filing a revision under Section 21-A of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, before the Second Respondent, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks permission of the Court to withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty to resort to the aforesaid procedure and he has made an endorsement to that effect in the court record. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/4

¶23

W.P. (MD) No. 7134 of 2018

¶24

In view of the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn, granting such liberty. It is made clear that for the purpose of reckoning limitation for availing the aforesaid remedy, the period from the date of filing of the Writ Petition, viz., 27.03.2020, till the date on which the certified copy of this order is made ready by the Registry, shall be excluded. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

12.12.2022

pkn

Index: Yes/No

Note: (i) Issue order copy by 22.12.2022.

¶29

(ii) Registry is directed to return the original copy of the impugned order under written acknowledgment after retaining a copy of the same for record.

¶30

¶31

The Assistant Commissioner, Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Board, Madurai.

¶32

The Joint Commissioner, Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Board, Madurai.

¶33

The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Balathandayuthapani Swami Temple, Nethaji Road, Madurai.

¶34

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶35

3/4

¶36

W.P. (MD) No. 7134 of 2018

¶37

P.D. AUDIKESAVALU, J.

¶38

pkn

¶39

W.P. (MD) No. 7134 of 2018

¶40

12.12.2022

¶41

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶42

4/4

G.Murugesan, v. the Asst Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Murugesan, v. the Asst Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Perumal Vasantha Vs the Income Tax Officer

Selvi Vs the Joint Commissioner

Perumal Vasantha Vs National Faceless Assessment Centre

Tvl. Nanjil Recreation Club Vs The State Tax Officer

Murugesan.C Vs The Commissioner

T.Ramesh Babu, S/O.Thulasiram, Vs the Commissfioner