Duraikannan v. The Joint Commissioner
Case brief
What is this about?
W.P.(MD) No.20242 of 2025, Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), decided 24.07.2025 by C.SARAVANAN, J. Keywords: writ of mandamus; Article 226; HR & CE Department; public temple status; Sri Vinayagaperuman Temple; Arulmigu Sri Kaliamman Temple; Keelamuthupatti, Madurai; enquiry report; Notice Na.Ka.No.5475/2024-2/A4 dated 21.12.2024; petitioner's statement dated 09.01.2025; suo motu impleadment of Commissioner as fourth respondent; directions to consider representation and pass orders within three months; disposed of at admission; no costs; petitioner Duraikannan; third respondent Durai Bharathidasan; counsel S.Mamtha; Additional Government Pleader SS.Madhavan.
What did the court decide?
Writ petition disposed of at admission with directions and no costs: (i) the second respondent to forward the enquiry report to the Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Madurai within one month of receipt of a copy of the order; (ii) the petitioner to submit his statement (in compliance with Notice Na.Ka.No.5475/2024-2/A4, dated 21.12.2024) to the Commissioner; (iii) the Commissioner, suo motu impleaded as fourth respondent, to consider the petitioner's statement and pass appropriate orders on its own merits on the basis of the enquiry report within three months thereafter, after affording an opportunity to the petitioner, the third respondent and any other interested parties. The question whether the temple must be maintained as a public temple was not itself decided and is left to the fourth respondent's determination.