M. Saravanan Vs. The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Chennai and Others

M. Saravanan vs The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Chennai and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Apr 20, 2016

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1191299

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1191299
Court: Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge: B. Rajendran
Decided On: Apr 20, 2016
Case Number: W.P(MD).No. 7608 of 2016 & W.M.P.(MD).Nos. 6354 & 6355 of 2016
Subject: Constitution

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Constitution

Key legal issue: Constitution

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

M. Saravanan

Respondent

The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Chennai and Others

Excerpt

(prayer: writ petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india for the issuance of a writ of mandamus to issue a direction directing the respondents 1 to 8 to take appropriate action against the respondents 9 and 10 for illegally parting with karuppucode shenbaga kuthan kandan sastha temples property as well as excommunicating the families including the petitioner's family members from social gathering with the villagers of the karuppucode village and further ensure the petitioner and other family members right to worship karuppucode shenbaga kuthan kandan sastha temples based on his representation dated 05.03.2016.) 1. when the matter is taken up for hearing, mr.jinnah mohamed, the sub-inspector of police attached to the eraniel station is present before this court. as per the instructions, the learned additional government pleader submitted that the police complaint given by the petitioner was enquired into and in that enquiry, the respondents 9 and 10 were also present. it is made clear by the private parties that they are not in anyway prohibiting or stopping the petitioner from participating or worshipping in the temple. further, there is no excommunication as alleged by the petitioner also. it is also brought to the notice of this court that the temple is an exempted temple and it is directly controlled by the assistant commissioner. therefore, they are taking care of the management of the temple alone. they are allowing all the people including the petitioner to participate in the function as well as for worshipping. however, the management is vested with the assistant commissioner. to sum up, the complaint given by the petitioner has been properly looked into by the official respondents and no order is necessary in this writ petition. 2. recording the afore-said aspect of the matter, this writ petition stands closed. no costs. consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Full Judgment

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a WRIT OF MANDAMUS to issue a direction directing the respondents 1 to 8 to take appropriate action against the respondents 9 and 10 for illegally parting with Karuppucode Shenbaga Kuthan Kandan Sastha Temples property as well as excommunicating the families including the petitioner's family members from social gathering with the villagers of the Karuppucode village and further ensure the petitioner and other family members right to worship Karuppucode Shenbaga Kuthan Kandan Sastha Temples based on his representation dated 05.03.2016.)

1. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr.Jinnah Mohamed, the Sub-inspector of Police attached to the Eraniel Station is present before this Court. As per the instructions, the learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the police complaint given by the petitioner was enquired into and in that enquiry, the respondents 9 and 10 were also present. It is made clear by the private parties that they are not in anyway prohibiting or stopping the petitioner from participating or worshipping in the temple. Further, there is no excommunication as alleged by the petitioner also. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the temple is an exempted temple and it is directly controlled by the Assistant Commissioner. Therefore, they are taking care of the management of the temple alone. They are allowing all the people including the petitioner to participate in the function as well as for worshipping. However, the management is vested with the Assistant Commissioner. To sum up, the complaint given by the petitioner has been properly looked into by the official respondents and no order is necessary in this Writ Petition.

2. Recording the afore-said aspect of the matter, this Writ Petition stands closed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Same Court & Year Chennai Madurai · 2016 Same Parties M. Saravanan vs The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charita... Same Subject Constitution Same Judge B. Rajendran