Petitioner sought to restrain kumbabisekam at a Dindigul temple without hearing his community's objection and to exclude the temple from HR & CE control. The Court held the first relief premature and the second requiring adjudication before the statutory authority, dismissing the writ petition.
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.
W.P.(MD)No.14571 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 10.07.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE
W.P(MD).No.14571 of 2025 and W.M.P(MD)No.10788 of 2025
R.Bangaru
... Petitioner
-vs-
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondent to conduct the kumbabisekam without considering our community objection and to direct the respondent exclude the temple from HR & CE and not to interfere in the administration of Arulmighu Sri Venkittammal Thirukovil situated at A.Vellodu Village, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District.
1/4
W.P.(MD)No.14571 of 2025
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Manikandan For Respondents : Mr.P.Subbaraj Special Government Pleader
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to forbear the respondents from conducting Kumbabisekam is premature and the petitioner himself is not clear about the decision taken to perform Kumbabisekam.
2/4
W.P.(MD)No.14571 of 2025
costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(S.M.S., J.) (A.D.M.C., J.)
10.07.2025
NCC :yes/No Index :yes/No Internet:yes/No rgm
To
3/4
W.P.(MD)No.14571 of 2025
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. and A.D.MARIA CLETE, J.
rgm
W.P(MD).No.14571 of 2025 and W.M.P(MD)No.10788 of 2025
10.07.2025
4/4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Court should restrain the respondents from conducting the kumbabisekam without considering the community objection.
Whether the temple can be excluded from HR & CE administration in a writ petition.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
R.Bangaru
The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Dindigul
The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Dindigul
S.M.Subramaniam
A.D.Maria Clete
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
