V.Nagaraj v. the Commissioner
Case brief
What is this about?
Temple administration and management; Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Department; writ of mandamus; Article 226 Constitution of India; appointment of fit person; allegations of mismanagement by temple managers; departmental enquiry; freezing of temple bank accounts; conduct of ensuing temple festival under proper supervision; protection of temple assets; Arulmigu Sri Veeramatchiamman Temple, Vadugapalayam, Pollachi Town and Taluk, Coimbatore District; disposal at admission stage without counter; no pronouncement on allegations; V. Nagaraj v. Commissioner, HR&CE Department; Rathina Vadivel; G.R. Jayagopinath; D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, J.; W.P.No.5107 of 2025; W.M.P.No.5669 of 2025; dated 14.02.2025.
What did the court decide?
The prayed-for direct appointment of a fit person was not granted by this Court; instead, with directions: the third respondent to proceed with the enquiry into the temple affairs, hear respondents 4 and 5, consider all contentions of the parties and decide in accordance with law; to consider the request regarding the ensuing temple festival and conduct it under proper supervision; and to ensure the temple affairs are maintained properly and its assets remain intact. Petition disposed of with these directions; no costs; connected miscellaneous petition (W.M.P.No.5669 of 2025) closed.