Dismissed¶41

P.S.Shanmugasundaram v. The State of TamilNadu

Madras HC25 Mar 2025WA/2812/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court Division Bench (S.M. Subramaniam and K. Rajasekar JJ.), WA No. 2812 of 2024, judgment dated 25-03-2025: election of Chairman amongst trustees of Arulmigu Thiruvalleeswarar Temple, Padi; appellant's claim as sole hereditary trustee to automatic chairmanship under Section 48, Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959; 1949 District Collector scheme (three trustees, one elected Chairman); improper election conduct to be raised as election dispute; writ appeal dismissed, order in W.P.No.13571 of 2023 dated 28.04.2023 confirmed, connected CMP.No.20626 of 2024 closed.

What did the court decide?

None; the writ appeal is dismissed with no costs, the order in W.P.No.13571 of 2023 dated 28.04.2023 stands confirmed, and the connected Miscellaneous Petition (CMP.No.20626 of 2024) is closed. ¶41

P.S.Shanmugasundaram Vs The State of TamilNadu — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the writ appeal is dismissed with no costs, the order in W.P.No.13571 of 2023 dated 28.04.2023 stands confirmed, and the connected Miscellaneous Petition (CMP.No.20626 of 2024) is closed.

¶41

Issue for consideration

Whether the election of the 6th respondent as Chairman of Arulmigu Thiruvalleeswarar Temple, Padi, was validly conducted, notwithstanding the appellant's contention that as sole hereditary trustee he automatically becomes Chairman under Section 48 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. +1 more

¶33

Court's answer

Amongst the three trustees, two trustees voted in favour of the 6th respondent, who was accordingly elected as Chairman in accordance with the scheme applicable to the Temple and the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959.

¶39

Ratio / Principle

If elections are not conducted in accordance with law, as alleged by the appellant, the remedy available to him is to raise an election dispute to resolve the issues, not the present writ appeal.

¶39

Key takeaways

The findings of the learned Single Judge are in consonance with the scheme applicable to the Temple and the relevant provisions of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959.ratio¶40
This Court finds no acceptable reasons for interference with the order of the Writ Court dated 28.04.2023 in W.P.No.13571 of 2023; the writ order stands confirmed and the writ appeal is dismissed.ratio¶41

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Appeal (WA No. 2812 of 2024, High Court of Judicature at Madras, decided 25-03-2025) against the order dated 28.04.2023 in W.P.No.13571 of 2023. The appellant, claiming to be the sole hereditary trustee of Arulmigu Thiruvalleeswarar Temple, Padi, challenged the election of the 6th respondent as Chairman, contending that under Section 48 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 he automatically becomes Chairman. The Court recorded that the scheme framed by the District Collector in 1949, following a decision of the High Court, remained in force and provided for three trustees with one elected as Chairman; on the submission made on behalf of the Temple, two of the three trustees voted in favour of the 6th respondent, who was duly elected. The Court held that any grievance regarding the conduct of the election lay in an election dispute, not in the writ appeal. Finding the learned Single Judge's conclusions consonant with the scheme and the Act, the Division Bench declined interference, confirmed the writ order, dismissed the appeal with no costs, and closed the connected Miscellaneous Petition (CMP.No.20626 of 2024).

¶1

WA No. 2812 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 25-03-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

¶7

WA No. 2812 of 2024

¶8

and

¶9

CMP.No.20626 of 2024

¶10

P.S.Shanmugasundaram (Hereditary Trustee), S/o. Somasundaram, No. 26, South Mada Street, Padi, Chennai - 50.

¶11

Appellant(s)

¶12

¶13

The State of TamilNadu

¶14

Rep by its The Principal secretary to Government, Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments RE (3-1) Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.

¶15

2.The Commissioner,

¶16

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Nungambakkam, Chennai-34.

¶17

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

¶18

WA No. 2812 of 2024

¶19

3.The Joint Commissioner of Hind Religious and Charitable Endowment, Yadhava Street, Padi, Chennai - 50.

¶20

4.The Assistant Commissioner, Hind Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Yadhava Street, Padi, Chennai - 50.

¶21

5.The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Thiruvalleeswarar Temple, Padi, Chennai - 50.

¶22

6.Mr.R.Vijay, S/o. S.Rangarajan, 19/20, A-Block, Land Marvel Flats, Sannadhi Street, Villivakkam, Chennai - 600 049.

¶23

Respondent(s)

¶24

PRAYER

¶25

To set aside the order dated 28.04.2023 in WP No.13571 of 2023.

¶26

For Appellant(s): Mr.J. Adithya Reddy

¶27

For Respondent(s): M/s.N.R.R.Arun Nataraj Special Govt. Pleader (HR & CE ) For R1&5 Mr.R.Shanmugasundaram, Senior Counsel For Ms. A.G.Shakeena Mr.D.Senthur Kugan For R6

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

(Judgment of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.)

¶30

The Writ Order dated 28.04.2023 passed in W.P.No.13751 of 2023 is sought to be assailed in the present Writ Appeal.

¶31

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

¶32

WA No. 2812 of 2024

¶33

The election of the 6th respondent as Chairman of Arulmigu Thiruvalleswarar Temple, Padi, Chennai, is questioned by the appellant, mainly on the ground that, he is the sole hereditary trustee, and under Section 48 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, he becomes the Chairman automatically. As the appellant is the only hereditary trustee among the three trustees, the authorities have no option but to accept the hereditary trustee as the Chairman.

¶34

It is not in dispute that the scheme framed by the District Collector in 1949, following the decision of the High Court, is still in force. According to this scheme, three trustees are to be appointed, and one of these trustees will be elected as Chairman.

¶35

Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Temple would submit that election was conducted in the presence of the competent authorities. The 6th respondent voted for himself, and the other two trustees have voted in favour of the 6th respondent. Therefore, the 6th respondent was elected as chairman. Therefore, the procedure as contemplated under the scheme and in accordance with the provisions of the Act, had been followed.

¶36

Learned counsel for the appellant would dispute the said fact by stating that election was improperly conducted. The appellant claims that he has not voted for himself. He is raising a serious dispute about the conduct of

¶37

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

¶38

WA No. 2812 of 2024

¶39

election. If at all elections are not conducted in accordance with law, as stated by the appellant, the option left upon to him is to raise an election dispute to resolve the issues. As as far the present Writ Appeal is concerned, it is all about election of Chairman amongst the trustees and as per the submission made on behalf of the Temple amongst three trustees, two trustees voted in favour of the 6th respondent and he was elected.

¶40

That being so, the findings of the learned Single Judge is in consonance with the scheme applicable to the Temple and as well as the relevant provisions under the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959.

¶41

Thus, this Court do not find any acceptable reasons for interference with the order of the Writ Court in W.P.No.13571 of 2023 dated 28.04.2023. Accordingly, W.P.No.13571 of 2023 dated 28.04.2023 stands confirmed and the present Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶42

(S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.)(K.RAJASEKAR J.)

¶43

25-03-2025

¶44

¶45

Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No

¶46

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

¶47

WA No. 2812 of 2024

¶48