Malayala Sastha Ayyanar Temple Vs The Revenue… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

Malayala Sastha Ayyanar Temple Vs The Revenue… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the first respondent to act on the petitioner's fresh representation and dispose of it within twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt, after conducting an inquiry and providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and the third respondent; petitioner to submit a fresh representation within one (1) week enclosing all relevant documents; no costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondents 1 and 2 should be directed by writ of mandamus to revert Patta No.1706 dated 12.07.2017 to the name of the temple after conducting an enquiry in compliance with the principles of natural justice.

Court's answer

Without going into the merits, the writ petition is disposed of.

Ratio / Principle

First respondent directed to act on the petitioner's fresh representation and dispose of it within twelve (12) weeks from receipt thereof after conducting an inquiry and providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and the third respondent; petitioner to submit the fresh representation within one (1) week enclosing all relevant documents; no costs.

Key takeaways

In view of the Government Advocate's submission, notice to the third respondent was held unnecessary in the writ petition.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition under Article 226 filed by the purported hereditary trustee of Arulmighu Malayala Sastha Ayyanar Temple seeking reversion/cancellation of Patta No.1706 dated 12.07.2017, by which the third respondent was recorded as pattathar. The Government Advocate pointed out that there was no acknowledgement for the petitioner's representation dated 23.07.2025 and undertook that a fresh representation would be considered and disposed of on merits by the Revenue Divisional Officer after affording a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and the third respondent. Holding that notice to the third respondent had become unnecessary, the Court, without going into the merits, disposed of the writ petition by directing the first respondent to act on a fresh representation, to be submitted by the petitioner within one week enclosing all relevant documents, and to dispose of it within twelve weeks after conducting an inquiry and providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and the third respondent. No costs.

W.P(MD)NO.25203 of 2025

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 16.09.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

W.P(MD)No.25203 of 2025

Malayala Sastha Ayyanar Temple ... Petitioner

Vs

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Collectorate Office, Sivagangai District.

The Thasildhar, Singampunari Taluk, Sivagangai District.

A.Raja ... Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to revert back the Patta bearing No.1706 dated 12.07.2017 to its earlier position in the name of 'Arulmighu Malayala Sastha Ayyanar Temple', K.Pudhupatti, Dharmapatti Post, Singampunari Taluk, Sivagangai District on conducting enquiry in compliance with the principles of Natural Justice.

For Petitioner : Mr. R.G.Shankar Ganesh For Respondents : Mr.K.R.Badurus Zaman Government Advocate

1/4

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

W.P(MD)NO.25203 of 2025

O R D E R

By asserting that the petitioner is a hereditary trustee of the Arulmighu Malayala Sastha Ayyanar Temple, the petitioner seeks cancellation of the patta No.1706 by which the third respondent was recorded as a pattathar.

Learned Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondents 1 and 2. After pointing out that there is no acknowledgement for representation dated 23.07.2025, he submits that a fresh representation from the petitioner would be considered and disposed of on the merits by the Revenue Divisional Officer after providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and the third respondent herein.

In view of the above submissions, notice to the third respondent has become unnecessary in this Writ Petition.

Accordingly, without going into the merits, this Writ Petition is

2/4

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

W.P(MD)NO.25203 of 2025

disposed of by directing the first respondent to act on the fresh representation of the petitioner and dispose of the same within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt thereof after conducting an inquiry and providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and the third respondent. A fresh representation shall be submitted by the petitioner within one (1) week from this order by enclosing all relevant documents. No costs.

NCS : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No apd

16.09.2025

To 1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Collectorate Office, Sivagangai District.

The Thasildhar, Singampunari Taluk, Sivagangai District.

3/4

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

W.P(MD)NO.25203 of 2025

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY.,J.

apd

ORDER MADE IN

W.P(MD)No.25203 of 2025

16.09.2025

4/4

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