Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

A. Ajikumar, Vs The Commissioner — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Home
Madras HC
2025
A. Ajikumar, Vs The CommissionerA. Ajikumar, v. The Commissioner

Allowed¶27

A. Ajikumar, v. The Commissioner

HR&CE temple service – Transfer

Madras HC16 Jun 2025WA(MD)/91/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench (Division Bench of G.R.Swaminathan and K.Rajasekar JJ., 16.06.2025) in W.A(MD)No.91 of 2023: writ appeal by A.Ajikumar, HR&CE temple Watchman, against the learned single Judge's common order in W.P(MD)No.6515 of 2017 confirming his posting at Thirupparappu after four successive transfers in 2017. Held that since the 2020 statutory Rules (Rule 17) post-dated the transfers and the post of watchman was not a transferable post at the relevant time, the transfer orders and the single Judge's order were set aside; appellant to be posted as watchman at Arulmigu Shree Krishnaswamy Temple, Puliyoorsalai. Appeal allowed, no costs. Keywords: HR&CE, temple employee, transfer, non-transferable post, Rule 17, 2020 Rules.

What did the court decide?

Writ Appeal allowed; transfer orders impugned in the writ petition and the learned single Judge's order set aside; appellant to be posted as watchman in Arulmigu Shree Krishnaswamy Temple, Puliyoorsalai; no order as to costs.

Why is it important?

Since the Division Bench was satisfied that during the relevant time (before the 2020 Rules) the post of watchman was not a transferable post, the transfer orders impugned in the writ petition are set aside, and the order of the learned single Judge is also set aside. ¶26

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ Appeal allowed; transfer orders impugned in the writ petition and the learned single Judge's order set aside; appellant to be posted as watchman in Arulmigu Shree Krishnaswamy Temple, Puliyoorsalai; no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the successive transfer orders passed prior to the promulgation of the 2020 statutory Rules were sustainable, given that the post of Watchman during the relevant time was claimed not to be a transferable post.

Ratio / Principle

Since the Division Bench was satisfied that during the relevant time (before the 2020 Rules) the post of watchman was not a transferable post, the transfer orders impugned in the writ petition are set aside, and the order of the learned single Judge is also set aside.

Key takeaways

Thiru.A.Ajikumar shall be posted as watchman in Arulmigu Shree Krishnaswamy Temple, Puliyoorsalai.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

HR&CE temple service - Transfer - Appellant employed as Watchman in Arulmigu Shree Krishnaswamy Temple, Puliyoorsalai was subjected to four successive transfer orders (Suchindram, Thirupparappu, Puliyoorsalai, Ponmalai) in 2017 - Transfer orders were passed prior to the promulgation of the statutory Rules of 2020 under which Rule 17 permits transfer of temple employees subject to conditions - Held, during the relevant time the post of watchman was not a transferable post - Transfer orders impugned in the writ petition and the learned single Judge's order in W.P(MD)No.6515 of 2017 (para 17(a)) set aside - Appellant directed to be posted as watchman in Arulmigu Shree Krishnaswamy Temple, Puliyoorsalai - Writ Appeal allowed, no costs.

A

W.A(MD)No.91 of 2023

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 16.06.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

W.A(MD)No.91 of 2023

A.Ajikumar

... Appellant / Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Nungambakkam, Chennai.

2.The Joint Commissioner, Kanyakumari District Temples, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Suchindram, Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents / Respondents

Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order reserved on 17.10.2022 and delivered on 12.12.2022, passed by the learned single Judge in W.P(MD)No.6515 of 2017 insofar as para 17(a) alone and set aside the same and allow the Writ Appeal.

1/4

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

For Appellant : Mr.C.Kishore For Respondents : Mr.P.Subbaraj

W.A(MD)No.91 of 2023

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was made by G.R.Swaminathan J. )

Heard both sides.

2.The appellant herein is a temple employee. He was working in Arulmigu Shree Krishnaswamy Temple, Puliyoorsalai as Watchman in the year 2017. He was transferred from the said temple to Suchindram Temple and then to Thirupparappu and then to Puliyoorsalai and again to Ponmalai. Thus as many as 4 transfer orders were successively visited on the appellant. Challenging the same, the appellant filed W.P(MD)No.6515 of 2017. The Writ Petition was taken up along with few other writ petitions. The writ petitions were disposed of by the learned single Judge by a common order. The appellant was posted as Watchman in Arulmigu Mahadevar Temple, Thirupparappu. Challenging the order of the learned single Judge, this Writ Appeal has been filed.

3.Even though very many contentions were urged on either side, the issue can be resolved on a short and narrow ground.

2/4

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

W.A(MD)No.91 of 2023

4.The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the post of Watchman during the relevant time was not a transferable post. Of course, in the year 2020, statutory Rules were issued and Rule 17 provides for transfer of any temple employee subject to certain conditions.

5.The transfer orders in this case were passed prior to the promulgation of 2020 Rules. Since we are satisfied that during the relevant time, the post of watchman was not a transferable post, the orders impugned in the Writ Petition are set aside. The order of the learned single Judge is also set aside. Thiru.A.Ajikumar shall be posted as watchman in Arulmigu Shree Krishnaswamy Temple, Puliyoorsalai.

6.This Writ Appeal is allowed accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.

[G.R.S., J.] [K.R.S., J.] 16.06.2025

NCC : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No MGA

3/4

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

W.A(MD)No.91 of 2023

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J

and

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

MGA

To

1.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Nungambakkam, Chennai.

2.The Joint Commissioner, Kanyakumari District Temples, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Suchindram, Kanyakumari District.

W.A(MD)No.91 of 2023

16.06.2025

4/4

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

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the successive transfer orders passed prior to the promulgation of the 2020 statutory Rules were sustainable, given that the post of Watchman during the relevant time was claimed not to be a transferable post.medium confidence¶25

Statutes considered

2 provisions across 2 enactments

AI extract

Letters PatentClause 15¶12
Rule 17Rule 17¶25

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order of the learned single Judge in W.P(MD)No.6515 of 2017, challenged insofar as para 17(a); order was reserved on 17.10.2022 and delivered on 12.12.2022.¶12
Learned single Judge, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court · 12.12.2022
Prior proceeding
Appellant, a temple employee working as Watchman in Arulmigu Shree Krishnaswamy Temple, Puliyoorsalai (2017), was successively transferred four times: to Suchindram Temple, then Thirupparappu, then Puliyoorsalai, and again to Ponmalai.¶20
Prior proceeding
Appellant filed W.P(MD)No.6515 of 2017 challenging the transfer orders; the writ petition was taken up with other writ petitions and disposed of by the learned single Judge by a common order.¶20
Prior proceeding
By the common order, the appellant was posted as Watchman in Arulmigu Mahadevar Temple, Thirupparappu; challenging this order, the present Writ Appeal was filed.¶20
Prior proceeding
In 2020, statutory Rules were issued; Rule 17 thereof provides for transfer of any temple employee subject to certain conditions, but the transfer orders in question pre-date those Rules.¶25

Parties & counsel

AI extract

appellant
A.Ajikumar¶20
Mr.C.Kishore
respondent
The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Nungambakkam, Chennai.¶10
Mr.P.Subbaraj
respondent
The Joint Commissioner, Kanyakumari District Temples, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Suchindram, Kanyakumari District.¶11
Mr.P.Subbaraj

Coram

AI extract

G.R.Swaminathanauthor¶18
K.Rajasekarmember¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 16 Jun 2025 · June
Registered: 1 Feb 2023
Case no.: WA(MD)/91/2023
CNR: HCMD010094502023
Bench: G.r.swaminathan K.rajasekar
Disposal: ALLOWED
Case type: W.A(MD)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from G.r.swaminathan K.rajasekar

The District Collector Vs a.Manoj
13 Jun 2025
The District Collector Vs P.Arunkumar
13 Jun 2025
D.Jeyaseelan (died) Vs The Secretary to Government
13 Jun 2025
The Secretary Vs a. Malaichamy
16 Jun 2025
Bhavani Vs The Sub Registrar
16 Jun 2025
The President Vs B.Muthu
16 Jun 2025

Cite this judgement

A. Ajikumar, v. The Commissioner, WA(MD)/91/2023 (MAD), decided on 16 June 2025.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes2

Letters PatentClause 15
Rule 17Rule 17

View all statutes

Procedural history5

Order of the learned single Judge in W.P(MD)No.6515 of 2017, challenged insofar as para 17(a); order was reserved on 17.10.2022 and delivered on 12.12.2022.Learned single Judge, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court · 12.12.2022
Appellant, a temple employee working as Watchman in Arulmigu Shree Krishnaswamy Temple, Puliyoorsalai (2017), was successively transferred four times: to Suchindram Temple, then Thirupparappu, then Puliyoorsalai, and again to Ponmalai.
Appellant filed W.P(MD)No.6515 of 2017 challenging the transfer orders; the writ petition was taken up with other writ petitions and disposed of by the learned single Judge by a common order.

View full history

Bench / Coram

G.R.Swaminathan and K.Rajasekar

Parties & counsel