Disposed¶46

Palanisamy Kc v. The Commissioner

Madras HC10 Dec 2025WP(MD)/35167/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

HR&CE Act Section 79; temple land encroachment recovery/eviction; order dated 12.09.2025 in Miscellaneous Petition Nos.50 and 100 of 2024; Joint Commissioner HR&CE Trichy; Arulmigu Velamalai Kannimar Temple; Velakurichi Village, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy District; S.F.Nos.26/1, 26/6, 44/10, 230/5; 2.95.00 hectares punja land; hereditary trustee; revision petitions pending; non-implementation; writ closed, no costs; Article 226 mandamus; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; Krishnan Ramasamy J.; W.P.(MD) No.35167 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

While the grievance of the petitioner appears to be the non-implementation of the proceedings dated 12.09.2025, the materials placed before the Court indicate that the respondents have already initiated action in compliance with the said proceedings. ¶45

Palanisamy Kc Vs The Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.35167 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENGH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 10.12.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.35167 of 2025

K.C.Palanisamy

... Petitioner

The Commissioner,

¶11

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,

¶12

Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai - 600 034.

¶13

The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,

¶14

Trichy District.

¶15

The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,

¶16

Trichy District.

¶17

The Inspector, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,

¶18

Thuvarankurichi,

¶19

Trichy District.

¶20

Malayand, Hereditary Trustee, Arulmigu Velamalai Kannimar Thirukovil, Karadipatti, Velakurichi Village,

¶21

Marungapuri, Trichy District.

¶22

1/6

¶23

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

¶24

W.P.(MD) No.35167 of 2025

¶25

6. Malayandi

¶26

Palani

¶27

Malayandi

¶28

Palanisamy

¶29

Kanagu

¶30

... Respondents

¶31

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent to implement the order dated 12.09.2025 of the second respondent in Miscellaneous Petition Nos.50 and 100 of 2024, by invoking Section 79 of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act, recover the possession of the fifth respondent's Arulmigu Velamalai Kannimar Temple lands in S.F.No.26/1 to an extent of 1.90 Hectare, S.F.No. 26/6 to an extent of 0.13.50 hectare, S.F.No. 44/10 and S.F.No. 230/5 to an extent of 0.91.50 hectare total extent of 2.95.00 hectares of Punja land of Velakurichi Village, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy District, from the respondents Nos.5 to 10, within time frame as stipulated by this Court.

¶32

For Petitioner : Mr.A.N.Ramanathan For R-1 to R-4 : Mr. K.Balasubramani, Special Government Pleader For R-5 : Mr.S.I.Muthiah

¶33

2/6

¶34

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

¶35

W.P.(MD) No.35167 of 2025

¶36

O R D E R

¶37

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the third respondent to implement the order dated 12.09.2025 passed by the second respondent in Miscellaneous Petition Nos.50 and 100 of 2024, by invoking Section 79 of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments

¶38

Act, and to recover possession of the lands belonging to the fifth respondent’s Arulmigu Velamalai Kannimar Temple, situated in S.F.No. 26/1 to an extent of 1.90 hectare, S.F.No.26/6 to an extent of 0.13.50 hectare, S.F.No.44/10 and S.F.No.230/5 to an extent of 0.91.50 hectare, totalling 2.95.00 hectares of punja land in Velakurichi Village, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy District, from respondents Nos.5 to 10, within the time frame stipulated by this Court.

¶39

2. Mr. K. Balasubramani, learned Special Government Pleader, takes notice for respondents 1 to 4 and Mr. S.I. Muthiah, learned counsel, takes notice for the fifth respondent. Since no adverse orders are going to be passed against respondents 6 to 10, notice to them is dispensed with.

¶40

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the order dated 12.09.2025 passed by the second respondent has not yet been implemented. Hence, he has filed this present writ petition.

¶41

3/6

¶42

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

¶43

W.P.(MD) No.35167 of 2025

¶44

4 . The learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent submits that the order dated 12.09.2025 has already been processed. He further submits that steps for eviction of the encroachers have been initiated, certain revision petitions are pending and due notices have been issued.

¶45

5 . Considering the submissions made on either side, the grievance of the petitioner appears to be the non-implementation of the proceedings dated 12.09.2025. However, the materials placed before this Court indicate that the respondents have already initiated action in compliance with the said proceedings.

¶46

6. In such view of the matter, this Writ Petition stands closed. No

¶47

costs.

¶48

10.12.2025

¶49

Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No TSG

¶50

4/6

¶51

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