Dismissed

Chinnadurai T v. The District Collector

Madras HC9 Jul 2024WP(MD)/9400/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order dismissed two writ petitions challenging an impugned order regarding temple festival turns. The Court held that the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 was entitled to the peak season in 2022, so he is not entitled to it again in 2024. The petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 were denied the 2024 peak turn as it belonged to the 'B' Branch, with their next turn in 2026.

What did the court decide?

Both Writ Petitions No.9400 & 9404 of 2024 are dismissed; consequential miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Chinnadurai T Vs The District Collector — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

Reserved on 13.06.2024 Delivered on 09.07.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶6

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶7

and

¶8

W.M.P.(MD) Nos.8545 & 8546 of 2024

¶9

W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024

¶10

T.Chinnadurai ... Petitioner

¶11

Vs.

¶12

1.The District Collector, Collectorate, Tuticorin District.

¶13

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruchendur, Tuticorin District.

¶14

3.The Tahsildar, Eral Taluk, Tuticorin District.

¶15

4.D.Muthukaruppan @ Velayutham

¶16

5.D.Rajendran

¶17

6.D.Durai

¶18

7.D.Vaikunaramasamy @ Kumar ... Respondents

¶19

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

¶20

Page No. 1 of 38

¶21

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶22

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for

¶23

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to allow the petitioner to continue his poojariship for the period from 15.05.2024 to 14.09.2024 by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 20.03.2024 within the time limit as fixed by this Court.

¶24

For Petitioner : Mr.K.K.Samy For R1 to R3 : Mr.S.P.Maharajan Special Government Pleader For R4 : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai For R5 & R7 : Mr.H.Lakshmi Shankar for S.Ramesh For R6 : Mr.S.Rajasekar

¶25

W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024

¶26

1.M.Deivathadiyaan @ Manikandan

¶27

2.M.Muthukaruppan ... Petitioners

¶28

Vs.

¶29

1.The District Collector, Koramballam, Thoothukudi, Thoothukudi District.

¶30

2.The Revenue Tahsildar cum Executive Magistrate,

¶31

Eral, Eral Taluk,

¶32

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

¶33

Page No. 2 of 38

¶34

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶35

Thoothukudi District.

¶36

3.Mr.R.Gopalakrishnan,

¶37

Presently working as ISRO Land Acquisition Tahsildar, Tiruchendur, Thoothukudi District and

¶38

Previously working as Revenue Tahsildar cum Executive Magistrate, Eral Taluk, Thoothukudi District.

¶39

4.D.Rajendran

¶40

5.D.Durai

¶41

6.D.Vaikunda Ramasamy @ Kumar

¶42

7.T.Chinnadurai

¶43

8.M.Kalavathi

¶44

9.D.Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham ... Respondents

¶45

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings of the second respondent in e.f.M. 2/42/2020 dated 13.01.2024 and quashing the same and issuing a consequential direction to the second respondent to ensure that the annual turn for the year 2024 in respect of 4 months commencing from 14.05.2024 to 16.09.2024 (Vaigaasi, Aani and Aavani which includes Kodaivizha period) is given to the petitioner in Arulmigu Aarumugamangalam Shri Vembadi Sudalaimadaswamy Thirukoil.

¶46

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 3 of 38_

¶47

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶48

For Petitioners : Mr.N.Dilipkumar For R1 to R3 : Mr.S.P.Maharajan Special Government Pleader For R4 & R6 : Mr.H.Lakshmi Shankar for S.Ramesh For R5 : Mr.S.Rajasekar For R7 : Mr.K.K.Samy For R9 : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai *****

¶49

C O M M O N O R D E R

¶50

By this common order, both these Writ Petitions are being disposed

¶51

of.

¶52

These Writ Petitions have been filed by the respective petitioners

¶53

for the following relief:-

¶54

W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024

¶55

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 4 of 38_

¶56

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶57

For issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent [District Collector, Tuticorin] to allow the petitioner to continue his Poojariship for the period from 15.05.2024 to 14.09.2024 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 20.03.2024 within a time limit as fixed by this Court.

¶58

For issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records related to the impugned order of the second respondent [The Revenue Tahsildar cum Executive Magistrate, Eral, Eral Taluk, Thoothukudi District] dated 13.01.2024 bearing reference No.Na.Ka.Aa2/42/2020 and quashing the same and issuing a consequential direction to the second to ensure that the annual turn for the year 2024 in respect of 4 months commencing from 14.05.2024 to 16.09.2024 (Vaigassi, Aani, Aadi, Aavani which includes Kodaivizha Period) is given to the petitioners in Arulmigu Aarumugammangalam Shri Vembadi Sudalaimadaswamy Thirukoil.

¶59

'A' Branch 'C' Branch

¶60

Relevant portion of the impunged order dated 13.01.2024

¶61

impugned in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 reads as under:-

¶62

“vdNt> ghu;it 1 Kjy; 7 tiu cs;s Nfhupf;if kDf;fis guprPyid nra;Jk;> ghu;it 8-y; fz;Ls;s =PitFz;lk; tl;lhl;rpaupd; $l;l eltbf;if KbTfspd;gbAk;> ghu;it 11-y; fz;Ls;s khz;gik nrd;id cau;ePjpkd;w Nky;KiwaPl;L tof;fpd; jPu;g;Giuapd;gbAk;> Vuy; tl;lk;> nfhl;lhuf;Fwpr;rp fpuhkk;> MWKfkq;fyk; =Ntk;gb Rliykhlrhkp Nfhtpy; epu;thf nghWg;gpid khw;Wtjw;F gpd;tUkhW cj;jutplg;gLfpwJ.

¶63

Mz;L Kjy; ehd;F ,uz;lhtJ ehd;F %d;whtJ khjk; khjk; ehd;F khjk;

¶64

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 5 of 38_

¶65

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶66

2024 jpUQhdrk;ge; Kj;Jf;fUg;gd; nja;tj;jba jk; tifauh vd;w NtyhAjk;> h (v) ij khjk; 1- uhN[e;jpud;> Jiu> kzpfz;ld; k; Njjp itFz;luhkrhkp tifauh Kjy; vd;w Fkhu; (Gul;lhrp rpj;jpiu (nja;tj;jbah khjk; 1k; khjk; Kba gps;is Njjp Kjy; thupRfSf;F khu;fop Nkw;fz;l ehd;F khjk; Kba) khjq;fspy; rpj;jpiu khj ,Wjpapy; jpUxiyr;rPl;L %ykhf Nfhtpy; epu;thf xg;gilg;G KbT nra;ag;gLk;. (itfhrp khjk; 1k; Njjp Kjy; Mtzp khjk; Kba) Nkw;fz;l Row;rp Kiwapd;gb MWKfkq;fyk; =Ntk;gb RliykhlRthkp Nfhtpypy; guk;giu ju;kfu;j;jh nghWg;G kw;Wk; G+i[fs;/tpohf;fs; Kjyhdtw;iw jw;NghJ epu;thfk; elj;jp tUk; jpUitFz;luhkrhkp vd;gtupd; kfd; jpU.fNzrd; vd;gtu; Row;rp Kiwapd;gb> vjpu;tUk; ij khjk; 1-Mk; Njjp (15.01.2024 md;W) =Ntk;gb RliykhlRthkp Nfhtpypy; guk;giu ju;kfu;j;jh nghWg;G kw;Wk; G+i[fs;/tpohf;fs; Kjyhdtw;iw elj;jpl jpU. jpUQhdrk;ge;jk; vd;gtupd; kfd; jpU.rpd;dj;Jiu vd;gtUf;F nghWg;G khw;wp rhtp xg;gilf;f cj;jutplg;gLfpwJ.

¶67

Nkw;fz;l Vuy; tl;lk;> nfhl;lhuf;Fwpr;rp fpuhkk;> MWKfkq;fyk; =Ntk;gb RliykhlRthkp Nfhtpypy; guk;giu ju;kfu;j;jh nghWg;G kw;Wk; G+i[fs;/tpohf;fs; Kjyhdtw;iw Nkw;fz;l cj;juT Row;rp Kiwapd;gb Nfhtpy; nghWg;gpid Vw;W epu;thfk; elj;jTk;> rl;lk;> xOq;F gpur;rpid Vw;glh tz;zk;> Nfhtpy; epu;thfj;jpid elj;jplTk; NkYk;> Nkw;fz;l cj;jutpy; fz;l Row;rp Kiwapy; kl;LNk Nfhtpy; epu;thfj;ij khw;w Ntz;Lk; vdj; njuptpj;Jk;> mt;thW elf;f kWj;jhy; cau;ePjpkd;w mtkjpg;Gf;F cs;shfp fLikahd rl;l eltbf;if vLf;fg;gLk; vdTk;

¶68

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 6 of 38_

¶69

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶70

njuptpj;J ,jd; %yk; cj;jutplg;gLfpwJ.

¶71

NkYk;> Nkw;fz;l cj;jutpy; VNjDk; Ml;Nrgiz ,Uf;Fk;gl;rj;jpy; Nky;KiwaPl;L mYtyuhd jpUr;nre;J}u;> tUtha; Nfhl;lhl;rpau; mtu;fsplk; kD nra;J cupa gupfhuk; Njbf; nfhs;s njuptpf;fg;gLfpwJ.”

¶72

'A' Branch - The petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 & the 7^th respondent in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024

¶73

'B' Branch

¶74

The 4^th to 7^th respondents in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 & the 4^th to 6^th & 9^th respondents in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024

¶75

'C' Branch - The petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024

¶76

The petitioners herein along with others are descendants of

¶77

Deivathadiya Pillai (Senior). For the sake of clarity, a family tree is given

¶78

below:-

¶79

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 7 of 38_

¶80

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶81

'A' Branch : Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai and his descendants 'B' Branch : Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) and his descendants 'C' Branch : Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai and his descendants Ganesan : Adopted son of Vaikundaramasamy Pillai [other son Group of Deivathadiya Pillai (Senior)

¶82

There is a long pending dispute between two wings of Senior Deivathadiya Pillai namely, Vaikunda Muthukaruppan Pillai and Ramaswamy Pillai since 2002. The said dispute pertains to the rights to conduct the temple festival in the subject temple namely, Sri Vembadi Sudalaimada Swamy Temple at Arumugamangalm, Eral, Thoothukudi

¶83

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 8 of 38_

¶84

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶85

District.

¶86

Disputes are pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. They arise out of the Judgment and Decree dated 14.09.2005 passed in O.S.No. 182 of 2002. O.S.No.182 of 2022 was filed by Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai 'A' Branch before the District Munsif Court, Srivaikuntam, for a declaratory relief. The said suit was dismissed by the District Munsif Court, Srivaikuntam. In the said suit, a counter claim was filed by the father of the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 namely, Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai 'C' Branch. The counter claim was also dismissed by the District Munsif Court, Srivaikuntam, by its Judgment and Decree dated 14.09.2005.

¶87

Aggrieved by the same, two appeals came to be filed before the Additional Subordinate Court, Tuticorin in A.S.No.93 of 2007 by 'A' Branch viz., Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai [the father of the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024] and A.S.No.9 of 2008 by 'C' Branch viz., Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai [the father of the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No. 9404 of 2024]. The decision of the Trial Court was reversed by the Additional Subordinate Court, Tuticorin by its Judgment and Decree

¶88

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 9 of 38_

¶89

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶90

dated 26.04.2012.

¶91

Aggrieved by the same, the four sons of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) ['B' branch] namely Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham, Rajendran, Sudalaimuthu @ Durai and Vaikundaramasamy @ Kumar filed S.A.(MD) Nos.458 & 597 of 2012. Both the Second Appeals were dismissed by this Court on 12.09.2014.

¶92

Aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree dated 12.09.2014 in S.A. (MD) Nos.458 & 597 of 2012, two appeals are pending at the behest of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) ['B' branch] named above before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.L.P.(Civil) Nos.29755 & 29756 of 2014.

¶93

The dispute in these Writ Petitions is confined to the inter-se rights to conduct temple festival between grandsons of Muthukaruppan Pillai through his (1) first son Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) ['B' Branch], (2) third son Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai ['A' Branch] and (3) fourth son Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai ['C' Branch]. One of the sons of Muthukaruppan Pillai namely, Ramasamy Pillai has no claims over rights.

¶94

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 10 of 38_

¶95

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶96

The descendants of Deivathadiya Pillai (Senior) through his

¶97

first son Muthukaruppa Pillai representing three branches namely, Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai ['A' Branch], Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) ['B' Branch], and four sons and Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai ['C' Branch] approached the Tahsildar. In a peace committee meeting held on 13.01.2016, the Tahsildar had recorded an interim arrangement to be followed by three branches namely A, B & C pending final resolution of the dispute by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. As per the decision of the aforesaid Peace Committee, the right to worship is on rational basis.

¶98

The relevant portion of the interim arrangement agreed upon

¶99

between them before the Executive Magistrate/Tahsildar reads as under:-

¶100

“$l;lj;jpy; fPo;fz;l fUj;Jf;fs; tpthjpf;fg;gl;ld

¶101

1.KjyhtJ> %d;W jug;gpdUk; jkJ jug;Gf;F jyh ehd;F khjk; vd;gij Vw;Wf; nfhs;fpwhh;fsh vd;gJ Fwpj;J fUj;J Nfhug;gl;ljpy;> %d;W jug;gpdUk; jyh ehd;F khjk; vd;gij Vw;Wf; nfhs;tjhf rk;kjk; njhptpj;jdh;.

¶102

2.jkf;Fs; Ngrp cld;ghL Vw;gLj;jpl tha;g;G mspf;fg;gl;ljpy; jkf;Fs; Ngrpf;nfhs;s Ntz;bajpy;iy vd njhptpj;jjhy;> ,k;Kaw;rp iftplg;gl;lJ.

¶103

3.%d;W jug;gpdUk; MWKfkq;fyk; mUs;kpF =Ntk;gb RliykhlRthkp jpUf;Nfhtpy; G+i[ ifq;fh;aq;fis nra;J tUtjhy; Nkw;gb Rthkpia Ntz;b jpUTsr;rPl;L vOjp mjd; mbg;gilapy; KjyhtJ egh;> ,uz;lhtJ egh; kw;Wk; %d;whtJ egh; KbT nra;tJ njhlh;ghf %d;W jug;gpdhplKk;

¶104

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 11 of 38_

¶105

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶106

Nfhug;gl;ljpy; jpUTsr;rPl;L Kiwia Vw;Wf; nfhs;tjhfj; njhptpj;jdh;.

¶107

4.NkYk;> jpUTsr;rPl;L Kiwapy; Kjy;> ,uz;lhtJ> %d;whtJ egh; KbT nra;J> 2016k; Mz;L 1> 2> 3 vd;w thpirapYk;> 2018k; Mz;L 2> 3> 1 vd;w thpirapYk;> 2020k; Mz;L 3> 1> 2 vd;w thpirapYk; nghWg;G Vw;W elj;jyhk; vd;W> ,t;thpirapy; jyh ehd;F khjq;fs; nghWg;G Vw;Fk;NghJ> %d;W jug;gpdUf;Fk; nfhil elj;Jk; tha;g;G fpilf;Fk; vd;w tpguk; $wg;gl;L> %d;W jug;gpduhYk; Vw;Wf; nfhs;sg;gl;lJ.

¶108

5.NkYk;> ,J njhlh;ghf cr;rePjpkd;wj;jpy; njhlug;gl;Ls;s tof;fpy; toq;fg;gLk; jPh;g;gpd; mbg;gilapy; Nkw;fz;lthW tpthjpf;fg;gl;l eilKiwfs; jPh;g;gpd; mbg;gilapy; khWghl;Lf;FhpaJ vd;gJk; vLj;Jf; $wg;gl;L> midtuhYk; Vw;Wf; nfhs;sg;gl;lJ.

¶109

NkYk;> xt;nthU ehd;F khjKk; KbTw;wJk;> nghWg;ig epiwT nra;Ak; jug;gpdh; mLj;J nghWg;G Vw;Fk; jug;gpdUf;F vt;tpj gpur;ridAk; ,d;wp nghWg;ig Xg;gilf;f Ntz;Lk; vdTk;> mjpy; VJk; gpur;rid vOe;jhy; rl;lg;gb eltbf;if vLf;fg;gLk; vd;gJk; midtUf;Fk; $wg;gl;lJ.

¶110

Nkw;gb tptuq;fs; midj;J jug;gpduhYk; Vw;Wf; nfhs;sg;gl;L ifnahg;gkplg;gl;lJ.

¶111

,jidj; njhlh;e;J jpUTsr;rPl;L vOjg;gl;L> FYf;fg;gl;ljpy;> gpd;tUkhW jpUTsr;rPl;L fpilf;fg;gl;L thpirg;gLj;jg;gl;lJ.

¶112

1.jpU.jpUQhdrk;ge;jk;gps;is tifawh

¶113

2.jpU.Kj;Jf;fUg;gd; (v) NtyhAjk; tifawh

¶114

3.jpU.nja;tjbahd; (v) kzpfz;ld; kw;Wk; jpU.vk;.Kj;Jf;fUg;gd; tifawh

¶115

mjd;gb ij 1k; ehs; (15-01-2016) jpU.jpUQhdrk;ge;jk;gps;is tifawh Nfhtpy; nghWg;G Vw;f Ntz;Lk;. Nkw;gb egh; itfhrp 1-k; ehs; jpU.Kj;Jf;fUg;gd; (v) NtyhAjk; tifawhtplk; nghWg;ig xg;gilf;f Ntz;Lk;. Gul;lhrp 1-k; ehs; jpU.nja;tjbahd; (v) kzpfz;ld; kw;Wk; jpU.vk;.Kj;Jf;fUg;gd; tifawhtplk; jpU.Kj;Jf;fUg;gd; (v) NtyhAjk; tifawhtpdh; nghWg;ig xg;gilf;f Ntz;Lk;. ,k;Kiwfs; KbTw;wJk; mLj;j ij 1-k; ehs; 2017 Mk; Mz;L fNzrd; tifawh Nfhtpy; nghWg;G Vw;f Ntz;Lk;. ”

¶116

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 12 of 38_

¶117

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶118

Thus, the parties hereto are entitled to conduct temple festival from the year 2016 onwards on turns. A set of arrangement has been arrived at by dividing an English Year corresponding to Tamil Calender Year into 4 months starting from 15^th January and ending with 14^th January of the ensuing years.

¶119

Thus, the descendants of Muthukaruppan Pillai are entitled to manage the affairs of the temple and conduct the temple festival during even years, whereas, the Ganesan Group, the adopted son of Vaikunda Ramasamy Pillai and his wife Gandhimathiammal are entitled to manage the affairs of the temple and conduct the temple festival during odd years. The said Muthukaruppan Pillai has four sons. One of them has waived his rights.

¶120

Therefore, the descendants of Muthukaruppan Pillai through other three sons are entitled to manage the affairs of the temple and conduct the temple festival during even years. The even years were divided into three parts, so that, the three Branches of Muthukaruppan Pillai through his sons/grandsons can conduct the temple festival on

¶121

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 13 of 38_

¶122

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶123

rotational basis.

¶124

As per the interim arrangement, they are entitled to manage the

¶125

affairs of the temple and conduct the temple festival. For clarity, the

¶126

following chat is given below:-

¶127

*Year*	1^st *four months*	2^nd *four months*	3^rd *four months*
2016	A	B	C
2017		Ganeshan Group*
2018	B	C	A
2019		Ganeshan Group*
2020	C	A	B
2021		Ganesh Group*
2022	A	B	C
2023		Ganesh Group*
2024	B	C	A

¶128

Note:-

¶129

1^st four months : ij - rpj;jpiu [15^th of January - 14^th of May approximately] 2^nd four months : itfhrp - Mtzp [15^th of May - 14^th of September approximately] 3^rd four months : Gul;lhrp - khHfop [15^th of September - 14^th of January approximately]

¶130

The background of the dispute between the parties is on account

¶131

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 14 of 38_

¶132

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶133

of changes in 2022. As per the above table, the actual sequence should

¶134

have been “ABC” i.e., the first four months for 'A' Branch, second four months for 'B' Branch and third four months for 'C' Branch respectively. Instead of sequence “ABC” for 2022, the sequence that was followed in 2022 was “BAC”.

¶135

The elder son of Devathadiya Pillai (Junior) namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham deviated and usurped the first four months of 2022 to the exclusion not only his brothers but also 'A' Branch the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024. A representation was made to the Tahsildar to ameliorate the situation as there were disputes.

¶136

Pursuant to the representation of the elder son of Devathadiya Pillai (Junior) namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham, a notice was issued to the other wing namely, Ganesan, the adopted son of Vaikunda Ramasamy Pillai and his wife Gandhimathiammal, the other son of Deivathadiayan Pillai (Senior). The said notice was challenged by the said Ganesan before this Court in W.P.(MD) No.12740 of 2021.

¶137

By an order dated 15.12.2021, the said Writ Petition was

¶138

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 15 of 38_

¶139

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶140

disposed of with the observation that the arrangement has to continue till

¶141

14.01.2022. Thereafter, in the manner and the procedure which was adopted, the rights may be handed over to the said Vellayutham @ Muthukaruppan Pillai, who was to be the hereditary trustee, either by himself or with anybody who is aligned with him continue to perform pooja and other activities with respect to the temple till 14.01.2023. Thereafter, once again the arrangement was to revert back to the petitioner and his group. The Tahsildar was directed to ensure that there was peace insofar as worship in the temple was concerned.

¶142

Since the said Writ Petition was disposed of without involving the rest of the members of Branch A, B & C through Muthukaruppan Pillai, the issue came up before the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. (MD) Nos.10, 28 & 76 of 2022. The Court after taking note of the conduct of Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham, the elder son of Devathadiya Pillai (Junior) of 'B' Branch, passed the following orders on 11.07.2022:-

¶143

“ 5.The interim arrangement continued even thereafter, which is seen from the order in the W.P. (MD)No.17426 of 2018, dated 10.08.2018. It is to be noted that Velayutham @ Muthukaruppan claims exclusive right to perform pooja and other services for a period of four months in every turn of two years

¶144

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

¶145

Page No. 16 of 38

¶146

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶147

representing the branch of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) without an adjudication or a decision by any authority or forum so far. It is submitted before this Court by the other sons of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) that each one of them are also performing pooja and other services exclusively for a period of one month in every turn. In the said background, Velayutham @ Muthukaruppan approached the Tahsildar to declare him as hereditary trustee of temple. It is an attempt by the third respondent in the Writ Appeal to get an order behind the members of his own branch. In response to a representation of Velayutham @ Muthukaruppan, a notice was issued to the Writ Petitioner and Velayutham @ Muthukaruppan by the Tahsildar. This notice that was issued to the Writ Petitioner was put to challenge in the Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.12740 of 2021.

¶148

6.The learned Single Judge while disposing of the Writ Petition, appears to be under the impression that the dispute is between the two branches of Writ Petitioner/first respondent and the third respondent. Aggrieved by the order in the Writ Petition, the above three appeals have been preferred by the members of other branches and the brothers of Velayutham @ Muthukaruppan, who are entitled to perform pooja and other services in the temple as per the turn system.

¶149

7.All the parties have admitted before this Court that the order impugned in the Writ Appeals cannot be sustained, as the learned Single Judge has not considered the facts and proceedings, recognising/recording the rights of all parties, which are referred to by this Court in various proceedings. In such circumstances, this Court has no hesitation to hold that the impugned order of Writ Court cannot be sustained. Going by the records, this Court is also convinced that all the four sons of Deivathadiya Pillai

¶150

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 17 of 38_

¶151

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶152

(Junior) are entitled to perform pooja and other services in accordance with the turn system, as directed by the Tahsildar in 2016 and subsequently, in 2018 pursuant to a peace committee meeting . It is made clear that the third respondent in these appeals, namely, the second respondent in the Writ Petition, has no exclusive right to perform pooja and other services during the four months period representing Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) branch. The four months which should be allotted to the branch of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior), will be shared by Rajendran, Sudalaimuthu @ Durai Vaikundaramasamy @ Kumar and Velayutham @ Muthukaruppan equally. This arrangement will remain and continue to be in force till the disposal of the Civil Appeal filed as against the judgment of this Court in the two second appeals.

¶153

8.Since the issue was not before the Court with regard to the rights of Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai and Thirugnanasambandam, it is made clear that the right to perform pooja and other services for a period of four months as per the turn system which is recognised in favour of the heirs of Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai and Thirugnanasambantham cannot be interfered with and hence, this Court recognises and sustain the rights of all parties, as it was decided by the Tahsildar pursuant to the peace committee meeting, which was followed subsequently in 2018.

¶154

9.It is now admitted that the poojariship and other services have to be rendered by Thiruganasambatham, representing the third branch, and his right to perform the same till the end of Avani (month) will be intact. Thirugnanasambantham shall handover the keys to the heirs of Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai, by the end of Aavani. It is also admitted that the turn system should be strictly adhered to. Since one year is calculated from Thai to

¶155

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 18 of 38_

¶156

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶157

Margazhi, Ganesan is entitled to perform pooja and other services after completion of four months by the heirs of Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai by the end of Margazhi. The members, who are parties in the above appeals shall keep it in mind that the order of this Court recognising the practice followed so far should be strictly adhered to. Any person, who creates problems to any other branch shall be liable to be prosecuted for contempt of Court .

¶158

10.It is the grievance of the other heirs of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior), namely, Rajendran, Sudalaimuthu @ Durai, Vaikundaramasamy @ Kumar, that Velayutham @ Muthukaruppan, one of the sons of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior), was performing pooja and other services for the entire four months, that have to be shared by all the heirs of Deivathadiya Pillai Junior. Therefore, a request is made that Velayutham @ Muthukaruppan should be kept away from the pooja and other services for the next six years. It is open to the heirs of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior), either to agree for a workable solution mutually or approach the Civil Court for appropriate orders in case the issue cannot be decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶159

11.In view of the order passed by this Court, when an issue is addressed before the Executive Magistrate or Police Officials in relation to the affairs of the temple, they shall keep in mind the order of this Court, so that the arrangement will not be disturbed or modified under the guise of law and order issue, at the instance of any third party or any one of the parties to these appeals.

¶160

12.With the above directions, these Writ Appeals are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed .”

¶161

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 19 of 38_

¶162

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶163

As per 2016 arrangements, the correct sequence for 2024 would have been 'BCA'. It is the case of the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 ['C' Branch], that the Tahsildar in the impugned order dated 13.01.2024 has allowed the same sequence which was to be followed originally during 2022, whereas, the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 ['C' Branch] would be entitled to conduct temple festival only during the period starting from 5^th May, 2024 upto 14^th September, 2024 which is the peak period for the temple festival during year.

¶164

It is submitted by Mr.N.Dilipkumar for 'C' Branch [the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024], that 'C' Branch has the rights to conduct the temple festival during the Tamil Calender Month starting from Vaikasi (itfhrp) and ending with Aavani (Mtzp) in 2024 [15^th May - 14^th September] and this turn comes once in 6 years. It is submitted that the temple festival was allowed during the peak season for 'C' Branch last in 2018. This rights has been wrongly conferred on 'B' branch namely, 4 sons of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) vide the impugned order contrary to the order dated 11.07.2022 of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in

¶165

W.A.(MD) Nos.10, 28 & 76 of 2022.

¶166

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 20 of 38_

¶167

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶168

It is submitted that there was no fault on 'C' Branch viz., the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 and the impugned order of the Tahsildar made this allocation and changed the sequence contrary to the decision of the Division Bench of this Court. Particularly, the learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 would submit that in paragraphs 10 & 11 of the order dated 11.07.2022 in W.A.(MD) Nos.10, 28 & 76 of 2022, the Hon'ble Division Bench has categorically stated that inter se dispute between 'B' branch i.e., sons of Devathadiya Pillai (Junior) has to be worked out in a Civil Court and that the Tahsildar has to keep in mind the order of the Court in the said Writ Appeals as also the arrangements that was made between parties from 2016. Subsequently, a reference is made to paragraphs 8 & 11 of the Judgment which have been extracted above.

¶169

Defending the impugned order of the Tahsildar dated 13.01.2024, Mr.H.Lakshmi Sankar appearing for the other three sons of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) 'B' branch would submit that the arrangements was disturbed by their elder brother Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham during 2022. He had usurped the term of the first turn of

¶170

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 21 of 38_

¶171

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶172

T.Chinnadurai 'A' Branch [the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024]

¶173

during 2022, which was rectified by castelling the position by allowing 'A' Branch to take up the second turn during 2022 i.e., between 15^th May to 14^th September, 2022.

¶174

It is submitted that it would not mean that what was followed in 2022 should be allowed to be followed without required deviation. It is therefore submitted that the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024, sons of Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai ['C' branch] had consented before the Division Bench which was not challenged even though the rights stood vested with 'B' Branch during 2022.

¶175

It is submitted that merely because their elder brother had encroached the rights of 'A' Branch namely, T.Chinnadurai, the son of Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai [petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024] ipso facto would not mean that deviation in 2022 should not be corrected in 2024.

¶176

The learned counsel for the younger sons of Deivathadiyan Pillai (Junior) Mr.Lakshmi Shankar would draw attention to ground 10 in

¶177

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 22 of 38_

¶178

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶179

the affidavit filed in support of W.A.(MD) No.28 of 2022 against the order dated 15.12.2021 passed in W.P.(MD) No.12740 of 2021 which reads as under:-

¶180

“ 10. The Learned Judge failed to see that as per the terms of the peace committee meeting dated 12.01.2018 and 25.06.2018, the 1^st Respondent herein should handover the rights of the temple to one Thirugnanasampantham from 1^st Thai 2022, who in turn handover the rights to the Appellant 1^st Vaigasi 2022, and the 3^rd Respondent herein and his brothers are entitled for the rights from 1^st Protasi 2022, who shall handover the rights to the 1^st Respondent herein from 1^st Thai 2023 .”

¶181

The learned counsel for the younger sons of Deivathadiyan Pillai (Junior) would further submit that the right of the writ petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 ['C' Branch] is not affected, if as per the present turn, the younger sons of Deivathadiyan Pillai (Junior) namely, Rajendran, Sudalaimuthu @ Durai and Vaikundaramasamy @ Kumar are entitled to conduct the Kodai Vizha (nfhil tpoh) during the present year (2024) and the writ petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 ['C' Branch] will get their rights to conduct the festival in 2026.

¶182

He would further submit that taking advantage of the order

¶183

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 23 of 38_

¶184

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶185

passed by this Court dated 15.12.2021 in W.P.(MD) No.12740 of 2021, the eldest son of Deivathadiyan Pillai (Junior) namely, Velayutham Pillai @ Muthukaruppan Pillai had disrupted the normal cycle and took the charge during Thai (ij) in 2022, resulting in cascading changes for subsequent years. Therefore, the year 2022 should be considered as a first in the cycle year and the advantage derived by Group 'A' by conducting the Kodai Vizha in 2020 should be considered in the background of covid-restrictions celebration of festival.

¶186

The learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 T.Chinnadurai, S/o.Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai 'A' Branch would submit that before the interim arrangement was made in the year 2016, the parties were also following a turn system consistently, as per which, Ganesan was authorized to perform pooja etc., biannually. Remaining 3 Branches including the petitioner's Branch i.e., 'A' Branch divided 4 months each in a year. It is submitted that that 'A' Branch i.e., the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 and his father Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai were deprived their rights to perform pooja during the period between 15.05.2014 to 14.09.2014 and was enjoyed by 'B' Branch i.e., Deivathadiyan Pillai (Junior) and his sons. Therefore, to compensate

¶187

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 24 of 38_

¶188

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶189

the loss of turn, the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 T.Chinnadurai should be given a chance to perform the pooja during the year between 15.05.2024 and 14.09.2024 as 'B' Branch is going to take over the charge for that period.

¶190

He would further submit that the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No. 9400 of 2024 T.Chandran sent a representation dated 20.03.2024 to the third respondent Tahsildar, Eral Taluk. Since the said representation did not evoke any response, the petitioner filed the present W.P.(MD) No. 9400 of 2024 seeking for a direction to the first respondent District Collector, Tuticorin District to allow him to continue his poojariship for

¶191

the period from 15.05.2024 to 14.09.2024 by considering his representation dated 20.03.2024.

¶192

I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the private respondents and the learned Special Government Pleader for the official respondents.

¶193

Before dealing with the case of the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.

¶194

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 25 of 38_

¶195

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶196

9404 of 2024, I shall first dispose of W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 filed by

¶197

T.Chinnadurai, S/o.Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai ['A' Branch].

¶198

The petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of the 2024

¶199

[T.Chinnadurai, S/o.Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai ('A' Branch)] is seeking compensation for the loss caused to his father during the period between 15.05.2014 and 14.09.2014. However, much water has flowed since then. This prayer is contrary to the interim arrangement agreed upon between parties in the year 2016. The interim arrangement has also received the seal of approval partly in the order of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(MD) No.12740 of 2021 and in the order of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court dated 11.07.2022 passed in W.A.(MD) Nos. 10, 28 & 76 of 2022.

¶200

Therefore, there is no scope for entertaining the prayer of the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024, T.Chinnadurai, S/o.Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai. Thus, W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 is liable to be dismissed. That apart, during 2022 also, the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No. 9400 of 2024 [T.Chinnadurai, S/o.Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai ('A' Branch)] had the benefit of conducting the temple festival during peak

¶201

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 26 of 38_

¶202

Vaikasi (itfhrp) and ending with Aavani (Mtzp) in 2024 [15

¶203

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶204

season for the temple during the Tamil Calender Month starting from

¶205

Vaikasi (itfhrp) and ending with Aavani (Mtzp) in 2024 [15^th May - 14^th September]. Therefore, the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 namely T.Chinnadurai, S/o.Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai ['A' Branch] cannot as for repetition once again this year. Therefore, W.P.(MD) No. 9400 of 2024 is liable to be dismissed.

¶206

As far as W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 is concerned, as mentioned above, there is a long pending dispute between descendants of Deivathadiya Pillai (Senior) through his sons namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai and Vaikunda Ramasamy Pillai. The issue is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶207

Since the temple festival has to go on, an interim arrangement

¶208

was agreed upon before the Executive Magistrate cum Tahsildar on 13.01.2016, content of which has been extracted above, between the three brothers and their descendants through Muthukaruppan Pillai and Ganesan, the adopted son of Vaikunda Ramasamy Pillai and his wife Gandhimathiammal.

¶209

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 27 of 38_

¶210

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶211

There was a deviation in the arrangement by Muthukaruppan

¶212

Pillai @ Velayutham, the eldest son of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) ['B' Branch]. This was during the period when the temples were under the lock down due to the Covid-19 Pandemic.

¶213

Court is taking judicial cognizance of the fact that in 2020, w.e.f. 24.03.2020, the above interim arrangement as per the Executive Magistrate cum Tahsildar's order dated 13.01.2016 could not be followed in the sequence of 'CAB' due to the out break of Covid-19 Pandemic. W.e.f. 24.03.2020, restrictions were in place due to Notifications issued under the Disaster Management Act, 2005. The temple as also other public places were inaccessible. Worship in the temple in 2020 also would have been completely suspended for the whole of the year after 24.03.2020.

¶214

There were large scale disruptions and frustrations. The interim arrangement of the Executive Magistrate cum Tahsildar dated 13.01.2016 stood suspended during the period starting from 24.03.2020 till the end of 2021. In the legal parlance, the frustration is equaled with 'Act of God'. There would have been completely washed, frustrating the interim

¶215

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 28 of 38_

¶216

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶217

arrangements agreed upon between the parties before the Executive Magistrate cum Tashildar on 13.01.2016.

¶218

In fact, the other Wing of Deivathadiya Pillai (Senior) namely, Ganesan, the adopted son of Vaikundaramasamy Pillai and his wife Gandhimathiammal, whose turn fell for the period starting from 15^th January, 2021 to 14^th January, 2022 would have also been denied the rights to manage the affairs of the temple during the aforementioned period due to the lock down imposed by the Government on account of outbreak of Covid-19 which was partially restored by the order dated 15.12.2021 in W.P.(MD) No.12740 of 2021.

¶219

The petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 namely, Deivathadiyan @ Manikandan and Muthukaruppan, sons of Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai ['C' Branch], on the other hand, had benefited during the first two months of 2020 till 24.03.2020. The petitioners in W.P.(MD) No. 9404 of 2024 would have lost 52 days out of 120 days in 2020. The same petitioners also had benefit to manage the temple during the last four months during 2022 till 14.01.2023. It is the eldest son of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Vellayutham who

¶220

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 29 of 38_

¶221

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶222

usurped the position of Ganesan, S/o.Vaikunda Ramasamy Pillai. Rights of Ganesan, S/o.Vaikunda Ramasamy Pillai was restored vide order dated 15.12.2021 in W.P.(MD) No.12740 of 2021.

¶223

44.The eldest son of Deivathadiya Pillai (Jr.) i.e., Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham usurped the turn during the first four months in 2021 which should have actually gone to said Ganesh, S/o. Vaikundaramasamy Pillai perhaps on account of the disruption due to the closure of the temples during December 2020, to the exclusion of his brothers.

¶224

It is in this background, Ganesan who was otherwise entitled to

¶225

right during odd years stating from 15th January to 14th January in the ensuring year challenged the notice dated 07.07.2021 of the Tahsildar, Eral Taluk bearing reference No.Aa2/847/2019 issued pursuant to the representation given by the eldest son of Deivathadiya Pillai (junior) namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham, in W.P.(MD) No.12740 of 2021. The aforesaid notice was merely issued to the Ganesan, the adopted son of Vaikundaramasamy Pillai. It was in the background the said Writ Petition was disposed of on 15.12.2021 with the following observations:-

¶226

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 30 of 38_

¶227

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶228

“ 10.Let me not escalate the issue any further, but interfere with the order of the first respondent and permit the petitioner herein to continue to perform pooja in the manner the poojas have to be performed in that particular temple and collect emoluments from the poojas. This arrangement should continue till 14.01.2022. Thereafter, in the manner and the procedure which is adopted, the rights may be handed over to the second respondent/Vellayutham @ Muthukaruppan Pillai, who may as hereditary trustee, either by himself or with anybody who is aligned with him continue to perform pooja and other activities with respect to the temple till 14.01.2023. Thereafter, once again the entire role would revert back to the petitioner and his group.

¶229

11.Let that arrangement continue in the aforesaid manner and if at all there is a law and order problem or any controversy between the two groups, which I hope would not arise, and I further hope that the petitioner and the second respondent would be mature enough to avoid, the first respondent/The Tahsildar must enter into the fray and ensure that peace runs insofar as worship in the temple is concerned. But let such interference be only in exceptional circumstances and not as a rule.

¶230

12.With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is also closed. ”

¶231

Thus, the said Ganesan was permitted to continue to perform

¶232

pooja in the manner till 14.01.2022 and thereafter, in the manner and the procedure which is adopted, the rights has to be handed over to the eldest

¶233

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 31 of 38_

¶234

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶235

son of Deivathadiya Pillai (junior) namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham. Thus, the Court has rightly restored the position as far as Ganesan, the adopted son of Vaikundaramasamy Pillai and his wife Gandhimathi Ammal.

¶236

However, instead of following the sequence 'ABC' in 2022, the Court in its order dated 15.12.2021 in W.P.(MD) No.12740 of 2021 directed the rights to be handed over to the eldest son of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham from 15.01.2022. Thus, W.A.(MD) Nos.10, 28 & 76 of 2022 came to be filed before the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court by following persons:-

¶237

*Branch*	*W.A.* *(MD) No*	*Name of Appellant*	*W.P.(MD)* *No.*	*Name of the* *Petitioner*
'A' Branch	10/2022	M.Thirugnanasambandam Pillai	9400/2024	T.Chinnadurai, S/o.Thiruganansam bandam Pillai
'C' Branch	28/2022	M.Deivathadiyan @ Manikandan	9404/2024	1.M.Deivathadiyan @ Manikandan 2.Muthukaruppan
'B'	76/2022	1.Rajendran	-	-
Branch *		2.Sudalaimuthu @ Durai 3.Vaikunda Ramasamy Pillai@Kumar

¶238

Other son of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) R5 to R7 in W.P.(MD) No.9400/24 & R4 to R6 in W.P.(MD) No.9404/24

¶239

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

¶240

Page No. 32 of 38

¶241

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶242

It is under these circumstances, the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court had passed its order on 11.07.2022, content of which has been extracted above. By the said order, the rights of the parties was balanced.

¶243

Thus, on the date of aforesaid order dated 11.07.2022, it was agreed that Thirugnanasambantham Pillai, i.e. 'A' Branch now represented by his son T.Chinnadurai, the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 shall perform the rights till the end of 'Avani' [Mtzp] i.e., during the second fourth months starting from 15^th May, 2022 and ending with 14^th September, 2022 and thereafter, the said Thirugnanasambantham Pillai was to hand over the keys to the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 [Deivathaiyan @ Manikandan and Muthurkaruppan, S/o.Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai (Branch)].

¶244

Thus, the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 have not

¶245

lost a single turn as compared to others. Due to the disruptions on account of outbreak of Covid-19 Pandemic, both the 'A' Branch [the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024] and 'B' Branch lost their rights during 2020. In 2022, there was a wrong usurpation of the rights of 'A'

¶246

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 33 of 38_

¶247

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶248

Branch namely, T.Chinnadurai, S/o.Thirugnanasambantham Pillai, by the eldest son of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham. This was set right by the Hon'ble Division Bench in the above-mentioned order dated 11.07.2022 in W.A.(MD) No.10, 28 & 76 of 2022.

¶249

Thus, the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 have not lost the turn. Due to the disruptions on account of outbreak of Covid-19 Pandemic, both the 'A' Branch and 'B' Branch have lost their rights during 2020. In 2022, there was a wrong usurpation by the eldest son of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham

¶250

by usurping the rights of 'A' Branch namely, T.Chinnadurai, S/o.Thirugnanasambantham Pillai. This was adjusted by the Hon'ble Division Bench in the above order dated 11.07.2022 in W.A.(MD) No.10, 28 & 76 of 2022.

¶251

The turn to conduct the temple festival during the second spell i.e., 15^th May to 14^th September [itfhrp - Mtzp] which also comes once in 6 months should go to the 'B' Branch, sons of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior).

¶252

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 34 of 38_

¶253

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶254

The fact remains that 'A' Branch did not get the chance in 2020. However, 'A' Branch got the chance in 2022 during 'Avani' [Mtzp] i.e., during the second fourth months starting from 15^th May, 2022 and ending with 14^th September, 2022. Therefore, the next turn during this season would come to 'B' Branch and thereafter to 'C' Branch. Thus, the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 can be given rights during 2026. The current season rightly stands vested with legal heirs/sons of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham, Rajendran, Sudalaimuthu @ Durai and Vaikundaramasamy @ Kumar.

¶255

Therefore, W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 is liable to be dismissed as the rights of the parties have been recognized by the second respondent namely Revenue Tahsildar cum Executive Magistrate, Eral, Eral Taluk, Thoothukudi District vide impugned order dated 13.01.2024 bearing reference No.Na.Ka.Aa2/42/2020.

¶256

It is however open for the four brothers i.e., sons of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) to work out their inter-se rights between them

¶257

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 35 of 38_

¶258

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶259

as was ordered by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court vide order

¶260

dated 11.07.2022 in W.A.(MD) Nos.10, 28 & 76 of 2022.

¶261

However, liberty is given to the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.

¶262

9404 of 2024 to pursue the remedy independently before the Division Bench of this Court in Cont.P.(MD) No.833 of 2024, which was filed for non-compliance of the order dated 11.07.2022 in W.A.(MD) Nos.10, 28 & 76 of 2022.

¶263

In the result, both these Writ Petitions are dismissed. No costs.

¶264

Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶265

09.07.2024

¶266

(2/2)

¶267

Index: Yes / No Neutral Citation: Yes / No Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order

¶268

JEN

¶269

Copy To:

¶270

1.The District Collector,

¶271

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 36 of 38_

¶272

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶273

Collectorate,

¶274

Tuticorin District.

¶275

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruchendur, Tuticorin District.

¶276

3.The Tahsildar, Eral Taluk, Tuticorin District.

¶277

4.The Revenue Tahsildar cum Executive Magistrate, Eral, Eral Taluk, Thoothukudi District.

¶278

5.Mr.R.Gopalakrishnan, ISRO Land Acquisition Tahsildar, Tiruchendur, Thoothukudi District.

¶279

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 37 of 38_

¶280

W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024

¶281

C.SARAVANAN, J.

¶282

JEN

¶283

Pre-Delivery order Common made in W.P.(MD) Nos.9400 & 9404 of 2024 and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.8545 & 8546 of 2024

¶284

09.07.2024

¶285

(2/2)

¶286

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 38 of 38_

Chinnadurai T v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chinnadurai T 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sahabdeen .a Vs The Commissioner / Additional Chief Secretary

M.Ramesh Vs The Regional Transport Officer

Ramaraj Constructions, Vs The State Tax Officer

Dr.S.Gurushankar, Vs the Commissioner of Income Tax

Jeganathan.v.M Vs The Secretary to Government

M/S.Shanthi Feeds Pvt., Ltd., Vs the Commissioner of Customs