Writ petitions challenged a notice issued under the HR & CE Act regarding temple land occupation, claiming non-service of notices under Section 78 proceedings. The court found original records showed notices were issued and intimated to the petitioners, who approached with unclean hands. Writ petitions dismissed without costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1/11
WP No. 24661 etc., of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 16-07-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
WP Nos. 24661, 24664, 24672 & 24673 of 2025 AND WMP NOs.27799, 27804, 27808 and 27812 OF 2025
Chenchiraman Petitioner in W.P.No.24661 of 2024 Guna Petitioner in W.P.No.24664 of 2024 Gowri Petitioner in W.P.No.24672 of 2024 B.Nagajothi Petitioner in W.P.No.24673 of 2024
Vs
2/11
WP No. 24661 etc., of 2025
5.The Executive Officer Arulmigu Balasubramaniyasami Thirukoil, Chennabedu Village, Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District
Respondents in all W.Ps
PRAYER in W.P.No.24661 of 2024 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records in connection with notice in Na.Ka.No.1426/2011/A2/dated 23.6.2025 on the file of the 4th respondent and quash the same and forbearing the respondents 3 to 5 or their men or subordinates from disturbing or dispossessing of the petitioner in S.No.562 of premises bearing Door No.1,Vadakku street, Chinnambedu village, Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District.
PRAYER in W.P.No.24664 of 2024 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records in connection with notice in Na.Ka.No.1421/2011/A2/dated 23.6.2025 on the file of the 4th respondent and quash the same and forbearing the respondents 3 to 5 or their men or subordinates from disturbing or dispossessing of the petitioner in S.No.562 of premises bearing Door No.2/3, Melanda street, Chinnambedu village, Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District.
3/11 WP No. 24661 etc., of 2025
PRAYER in W.P.No.24672 of 2024 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records in connection with notice in Na.Ka.No.1419/2011/A2/ dated 23.6.2025 on the file of the 4th respondent and quash the same and forbearing the respondents 3 to 5 or their men or subordinates from disturbing or dispossessing of the petitioner in S.No.562 of premises bearing Door No.2/2, Melanda Street, Chinnambedu Village, Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District.
PRAYER in W.P.No.24672 of 2024 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records in connection with notice in Na.Ka.No.1422/2011/A2/ dated 23.6.2025 on the file of the 4th respondent and quash the same and forbearing the respondents 3 to 5 or their men or subordinates from disturbing or dispossessing of the petitioner in S.No.562 of premises bearing Door No.2/4, Melanda Street, Chinnambedu Village, Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District
For Petitioner(s): Ms.T.Gnana Banu in all W.Ps For Respondent(s): Mr.G.Velu in all W.Ps Additional Government Pleader for R1 & R2 Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan Special Government Pleader for R3 to R5
4/11 WP No. 24661 etc., of 2025
ORDER
All these writ petitions have been filed challenging the impugned notice
dated 23.06.2025, issued by the 4th respondent and to forbear respondents 3 to
5 from disturbing and dispossessing the petitioners from the subject property.
2.When these writ petitions came up for hearing on 07.07.2025, this
Court passed the following order:
Mr.G.Velu, learned Additional Government Pleader, take
notice for respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan, learned Special Government Pleader, takes notice for Respondents 3 to 5.
2. The only ground that has been taken in all these writ petitions is that the petitioners were not served with notices when proceedings were initiated under Section 78 of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act (hereinafter called as the “Act”) and that apart, the petitioners were not aware of the order passed by the Joint Commissioner under Section 78 of the Act dated
5/11
WP No. 24661 etc., of 2025
24.12.2012 and it was never served on them. The petitioners for the first time became aware of this order only when the impugned notice dated 23.06.2025 was issued by the 4th respondent under Section 79 of the Act.
3. The other ground that has been raised by the petitioners is that the subject property has been categorised as a “Vandi Pathai” in the revenue records and whereas, the temple is claiming to be the owner of the property.
4. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents 3 to 5 shall produce the original records to establish that after the order was passed under Section 78 of the Act dated 24.12.2012 by the Joint commissioner, the same was communicated to the petitioners.
5. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing
on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2 shall take instructions as to whether the subject property has been categorised as a “Vandi Pathai” and whether any communication has been sent to the petitioners considering to allot them with alternative accommodation.
6/11
WP No. 24661 etc., of 2025
6. Post these writ petitions at the end of the motion list on
maintained.
report before this Court. The relevant portions are extracted hereunder:
7/11
WP No. 24661 etc., of 2025
concerned, it has been categorised as 'Vandi Pathai' and no one occupies this
Vandi Pathai and this Vandi Pathai is located adjacent to the Kulakarai of the
temple.
8/11
WP No. 24661 etc., of 2025
5.The proceedings have been initiated under Section 78 of the HR & CE
Act for occupation of the property in S.No.1290/2, which stands in the name of
the temple.
6.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of HR &
CE Department produced the original records. On going through the same, it is
seen that notices were issued to the petitioners at the time of the proceedings
under Section 78 of the HR & CE Act. The order was passed under Section 78
of the HR & CE Act on 24.12.2012 and thereafter, the same was intimated to
the petitioners.
7.The original records that were placed before this Court goes against the
stand taken by against the petitioners as if they were never put on notice at any
point of time and that they came to know about the order passed under Section 78 only to the impugned notice dated 23.06.2025 was issued by the 4th
9/11 WP No. 24661 etc., of 2025
respondent. In other words, the petitioners have approached this Court with
unclean hands. That by itself disentitles the petitioners from claiming any relief
before this Court.
8.Considering the conduct of the petitioners, this Court was inclined to
impose cost against the petitioners. However, considering the submissions made
by the learned counsel for the petitioners, this Court restrains itself from
imposing any cost.
9.In the result, all these writ petitions stand dismissed. No Costs.
Consequently, connect miscellaneous petitions are closed.
16-07-2025
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No ssr
10/11
WP No. 24661 etc., of 2025
To
1.The District Collector Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur
2.The Tahsildar Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District
3.The Joint Commissioner H.R And C.E. Department, Vellore
4.The Assistant Commissioner Hr Ad Ce Department, Thiruvallur , Thiruvallur District
5.The Executive Officer Arulmigu Balasubramaniyasami Thirukoil, Chennabedu Village, Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District
11/11
WP No. 24661 etc., of 2025
N.ANAND VENKATESH J.
ssr
WP Nos. 24661, 24664, 24672 & 24673 of 2025 AND WMP NOs.27799, 27804, 27808 and 27812 OF 2025
16-07-2025
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners were served notices in proceedings under Section 78 HR & CE Act.
Whether the writ petitions challenging the Section 79 notice should succeed despite the records showing service.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Chenchiraman
Guna
Gowri
B. Nagajothi
The District Collector, Thiruvallur District
The Tahsildar, Ponneri Taluk
N. Anand Venkatesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
