Disposed

Periyasamy Gounder v. The Commissioner

Madras HC3 Jun 2024WP(MD)/10998/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition seeking removal of a temple renovation committee. Directing the Joint Commissioner to inquire into the petitioner's representations within eight weeks after hearing all parties.

What did the court decide?

Direction given to the Second Respondent to enquire into the petitioner's representations and dispose of the same within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.

Periyasamy Gounder Vs The Commissioner — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.10998 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 03.06.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.10998 of 2024 and W.M.P.(MD) No.9790 of 2024

¶7

Periyasamy Gounder ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Chennai – 600 034.

¶10

2.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Thiruppur.

¶11

3.The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Karur.

¶12

4.Arulmigu Sellandiamman Temple, Represented by its Board of Trustees, Noyyal, Pugalur Taluk, Karur – 639 117.

¶13

5.R.Gunasankaran Chairman,

¶14

1/5

¶15

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

¶16

Board of Trustee, Arulmigu Sellandiamman Temple, Noyyal, Pugalur Taluk, Karur – 639 117.

¶17

W.P.(MD) No.10998 of 2024

¶18

6.Murugesan

¶19

... Respondents

¶20

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to take action on the petitioner’s representation dated 19.04.2023 and 21.04.2023 seeking to remove the Thiruppani Committee headed by the 6^th respondent for the Kumbhabhishekam of Arulmigu Chellandiamman Temple situated in Noyyal Village, Pugalur Taluk, Karur District.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.R.J.Karthick For respondents : Mr.P.Subbaraj Special Government Pleader for R1 to R3 Mr.Athimoolapandian for R4 to R6

¶22

¶23

ORDER

¶24

This Writ Petition is disposed of at the time of admission after hearing

¶25

the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Special Government Pleader for the respondents 1 to 3 and the learned counsel for the respondents 4 to 6.

¶26

It is noticed that the petitioner has sent his representations to the first

¶27

2/5

¶28

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

¶29

W.P.(MD) No.10998 of 2024

¶30

respondents dated 19.04.2023 and 21.04.2023 and that the first respondent has taken cognizance of the petitioner’s representation against the alleged misdeed of the fifth and sixth respondents vide letter dated 26.05.2023 bearing reference in Na.Ka.No.22213/2023/T1, whereby, he has directed the second respondent to enquire into the complaint of the petitioner.

¶31

The learned counsel for the private respondents viz., respondents 4 to 6 would submit that the Writ Petition is misconceived and no Thirupani Committee has been constituted by the fifth respondent nominating either the petitioner and the sixth respondent or 26 others in the Thiruppani Committee.

¶32

It is submitted that the renovation work is strictly being worked out in accordance with the approval given by the second respondent and therefore, there is no merit.

¶33

Considering the fact that the issue is now been referred back by the first respondent to the second respondent to enquire into, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition and direct the second respondent to act

¶34

3/5

¶35

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

¶36

W.P.(MD) No.10998 of 2024

¶37

on the same and dispose of the petitioner’s representations dated 19.04.2023 and 21.04.2023 forwarded to the second respondent as expeditiously as possible within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Needless to state, the petitioner and also the respondents 5 and 6 shall be heard and other members, if any, nominated by the respondents 5 and 6, shall also be heard.

¶38

This Writ Petition is disposed of, with above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶39

Index : Yes / No 03.06.2024 Internet : Yes / No apd To 1.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Chennai – 600 034.

¶40

2.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Thiruppur. 3.The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Karur.

¶41

4/5

¶42

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

¶43

W.P.(MD) No.10998 of 2024

¶44

C.SARAVANAN, J.

¶45

apd

¶46

W.P.(MD) No.10998 of 2024

¶47

03.06.2024

¶48

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

¶49

5/5

Periyasamy Gounder v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Periyasamy Gounder 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

Ajay Prashanth M R Vs State Rep.by

K.Kumaresh Babu Vs R.Raja

K.Kumaresh Babu Vs R.Raja

V.S.B. Engineering College Vs The District Collector

M.Abdul Nazeer Vs The Tamil Nadu Waqf Board

Manoj Kumar Vs The Additional Superintendent of Police (Prohibition)