Dismissed

Chokkalingam @ Thondar Chona.L v. The Commissioner

Madras HC4 Jan 2023WP(MD)/26055/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed the petitioner's writ petition filed for selection as a hereditary trustee under the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act. The court allowed the withdrawal of the petition with rights reserved to seek remedy against disqualification under Section 26(5).

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn; petitioner's rights to challenge disqualification under Section 26(5) reserved.

Chokkalingam @ Thondar Chona.L Vs The… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P. (MD) No. 26055 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 04.01.2023

¶4

C O R A M

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU

¶6

W.P. (MD) No. 26055 of 2022 and

¶7

W.M.P. (MD) Nos.20186, 20189 and 20667 of 2020

¶8

L.Chokkalingam @ Thondar Chona ... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Chennai.

¶11

2.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Sivagangai.

¶12

3.Arulmigu Karpaga Vinayagar Temple, Represented by its present trustees, Pilaiyarpatty, Sivagangai District.

¶13

4.Thannermalai

¶14

...Respondents

¶15

Prayer in W.P. (MD) No.12122 of 2020: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the constitution of India, to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the impugned order passed by the second respondent

¶16

1/6

¶17

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

¶18

W.P. (MD) No. 26055 of 2022

¶19

herein in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.3103/2022/AA1, dated 04.11.2022 and quash the same as illegal and further direct the first and second respondents herein to accept and record my selection as one of the hereditary trustee of Arulmigu Karpaga Vinayagar Temple Pillaiyarpatti, Sivagangai District as per the provisions contemplated under Section 54(1) of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act, in the light of the resolution entry dated 01.09.2022 in the minutes book of the third respondent temple forthwith.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Meenakshisundaram For R1 and R2 : Mr.P.Subbaraj Special Government Pleader For R3 : Mr.VR.Shanmuganathan For R4 : Mr.Arun Swaminathan

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Heard Mr. V.Meenakshisundaram, Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, Mr. P.Subbaraj, Learned Special Government Pleader for the First and Second Respondents, Mr. VR.Shanmuganathan, Learned Counsel for the Third Respondent and Mr. Arun Swaminathan, Learned Counsel for the Fourth Respondent and perused the materials placed on record, apart from the pleadings of the parties.

¶23

2/6

¶24

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

¶25

W.P. (MD) No. 26055 of 2022

¶26

It is informed by Learned Counsel for the parties that in furtherance to the order dated 09.12.2022 passed by this Court, a General Body Meeting of the Third Respondent had taken place, in which a resolution has been passed clarifying the manner of selection of the trustees from among 20 family members and thereafter, an election had taken place in which the Fourth Respondent has been declared elected as one of two trustees of the Temple of the Third Respondent.

¶27

In view of the subsequent events, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks permission of the Court to withdraw the Writ Petition reserving the rights of the Petitioner to challenge the proceedings of the General Body Meeting and to file an appeal under Section 26(5) of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) before the concerned authority relating to his disqualification for contesting in the election for the post of trustees in future and he has made an endorsement to that effect in the court record.

¶28

In view of the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid clarifications. It is made clear that for the purpose of reckoning 3/6

¶29

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

¶30

W.P. (MD) No. 26055 of 2022

¶31

limitation for filing an appeal under Section 26(5) of the Act, the period from the date of filing of the Writ Petition, viz., 16.11.2022, till the date on which the certified copy of this order is made ready by the Registry, shall be excluded. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. No costs.

¶32

04.01.2023

¶33

¶34

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No

¶35

Note: (i) Issue order copy by 30.01.2023

¶36

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

¶37

4/6

¶38

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

¶39

W.P. (MD) No. 26055 of 2022

¶40

¶41

1.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Chennai.

¶42

2.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Sivagangai.

¶43

3.Arulmigu Karpaga Vinayagar Temple, Represented by its present trustees, Pilaiyarpatty, Sivagangai District.

¶44

5/6

¶45

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

¶46

W.P. (MD) No. 26055 of 2022

¶47

P.D.AUDIKESAVALU,J.

¶48

¶49

W.P. (MD) No. 26055 of 2022

¶50

04.01.2023

¶51

6/6

¶52

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

Chokkalingam @ Thondar Chona.L v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chokkalingam @ Thondar Chona.L v. The Commissioner

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

Gunabalan.a Vs The State Tax Officer

Gunabalan.a Vs The State Tax Officer

Rengaraj.S Vs the Joint Commissioner

Malayandi Vs the Asst Commissioner

Sri Sarguru Rajayoga Sangam Vs the Commissioner

Soma.Somasundaram Vs the Commissioner