M.MUTHUGANESH Vs The Commissioner,

M.Muthuganesh vs The Commissioner,

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Mar 27, 2026

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1434496

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/1434496
Court: Chennai Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani
Decided On: Mar 27, 2026
Case Number: WP/11631/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

M.Muthuganesh

Respondent

The Commissioner,

Excerpt

in the high court of judicature at madrasdated: 27-03-2026coramthe hon'ble mr justice m.dhandapani m.muthuganesh s/o.mr.m.murugadoss, no.4, kangeyam road, chennimalai, ..petitioner(s) vs3. s.kauveryrangan, s/o.singaravelu, no.91/18, south raaja street,4. indira tex ravi @ a.sugumar, s/o.v.angurathinam, no.14, south raaja street,5. s.srithar, s/o.subramaniyam, no.3, pazhakarar street, page1 of 46. s.shanmugasundaram, s/o.subrathinam, no.155, kennady street, ..respondent(s)petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india, praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the petitioners representation dated 16.10.2024 pursuant to the proceedings of the 1st respondent in o.mu.no.978682/2024/11 dated 13.11.2024 and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to take appropriate action against respondents 3 to 6 for collecting money from the public in the name of the community and temple without proper authority and without issuing receipts and to recover the amount of rs.24,54,619 collected by them and ensure that the same is utilized for the renovation works of arulmigu subramaniya swamy temple, chennimalai.for petitioner(s): mr.b.pachaiyappan for respondent(s): mr.n.r.r.arun natarajan, sgp for r1 & r2orderthe learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this court to withdraw the petition and he has also made an endorsement to that effect. page2 of 42. in view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the endorsement so made, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. there shall be no orders as to costs. index: yes/nospeaking/non-speaking orderneutral citation: yes/no dp to page3 of 4m.dhandapani, j.dp page4 of 4

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27-03-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI M.Muthuganesh S/o.MR.M.Murugadoss, No.4, kangeyam road, chennimalai, ..Petitioner(s) Vs
3. S.Kauveryrangan, S/o.Singaravelu, No.91/18, South Raaja Street,
4. Indira Tex Ravi @ A.Sugumar, S/o.V.Angurathinam, No.14, South Raaja Street,
5. S.Srithar, S/o.Subramaniyam, No.3, Pazhakarar Street, Page1 of 4
6. S.Shanmugasundaram, S/o.Subrathinam, No.155, Kennady Street, ..Respondent(s)
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the petitioners representation dated 16.10.2024 pursuant to the proceedings of the 1st respondent in O.Mu.No.978682/2024/11 dated 13.11.2024 and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to take appropriate action against respondents 3 to 6 for collecting money from the public in the name of the community and temple without proper authority and without issuing receipts and to recover the amount of Rs.24,54,619 collected by them and ensure that the same is utilized for the renovation works of Arulmigu Subramaniya Swamy Temple, Chennimalai.
For Petitioner(s): Mr.B.Pachaiyappan For Respondent(s): Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan, SGP for R1 & R2

ORDER

The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the petition and he has also made an endorsement to that effect. Page2 of 4

2. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the endorsement so made, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no orders as to costs. Index: Yes/No

Speaking/Non-speaking order

Neutral Citation: Yes/No DP To Page3 of 4

M.DHANDAPANI, J.

DP Page4 of 4

Same Court & Year Chennai Orders · 2026 Same Parties M.Muthuganesh vs The Commissioner, Same Judge Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani