1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:28.03.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN W.P.(MD).No.3320 of 2011 And M.P.(MD).No. 1 of 2011 Murugesan : Petitioner Vs 1. The Joint Commissioner Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department Trichy – 6 2. The Executive Officer, (Pudukkottai Temples) Public Office Compound Pudukkottai : Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the second respondent proceedings in his proceedings dated Na.Ka. 234/2010/J dated 10.03.2011 and quash the same as arbitrary, illegal. For petitioner : Mr.C.Selvaraj For 1st Respondent : Mr.K.Balasubramanian Additional Government Pleader For 2nd Respondent : Mr.G.Madhavan O R D E R The petitioner has come forward with this Petition praying to quash the proceedings of the second respondent proceedings, dated 10.03.2011. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that earlier the Executive Officer,Pudukkottai Devasthanam, has granted permission to his brother, viz., Dhanapalan and their family members to conduct the festival, on condition that they shall deposit a sum of Rs. 50,000/- in the name of the Executive Officer, Pudukkottai Devasthanam and the same was deposited by them, for conducting the first day Mandagapadi of “Muthu Mariamman” Temple at Thennangudi Village, Kulathur Taluk, Pudukkottai District. Subsequently, by an order, dated 25.03.2010, the second respondent cancelled the permission granted to the brother and to get back the deposited amount. Aggrieved against the said order, dated 25.03.2010, the petitioner has sent a representation to the Executive Officer, on 19.04.2010 and also an appeal was presented by the petitioner to the Joint Commissioner, on 19.04.2010. The petitioner now aggrieved against the order of the Executive Officer, stating that he has no jurisdiction and that he has to approach the Joint Commissioner, has come forward with this Writ Petition. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3. It is made very clear that the impugned order is made by the Executive Officer, admittedly who has no authority to deal with the subject as the petitioner is aggrieved against the order passed by the second respondent, for which only, the appeal would lie to the first respondent/the Joint Commissioner. Therefore, the impugned order is a valid order as he has no jurisdiction and rightly he has stated so in the order. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner on instruction would only request the Court that a direction may be given to the first respondent to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner which is pending. 5. Recording the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Court is inclined to direct the first respondent/ Joint Commissioner, to consider and dispose of the appeal presented by the petitioner in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders, after giving notice to all the parties concerned and give a personal hearing to all the parties concerned in their matter, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. With the above said observation, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs. vsg SD/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR[CO] /TRUE COPY/ SUB ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To 1. The Joint Commissioner Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department Trichy – 6 2. The Executive Officer, (Pudukkottai Temples) Public Office Compound Pudukkottai. +1cc to Mr.C.Selvaraj, Advocate SR.No.8285. +1 cc to Special Government Pleader, SR.No.8296. W.P.(MD).No.3320 of 2011 And M.P.(MD).No. 1 of 2011 Dated:28.03.2011 2P/5C RPB 20.04.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/