Periyanambi Narasimha Gopalan v. Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Board, Nungambakkam, Chennai
2024-08-13
L.VICTORIA GOWRI, R.SUBRAMANIAN
body2024
DigiLaw.ai
ORDER : (R. Subramanian, J.) : (Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to restore the Valai Veesi Theppakulam and Kalakovil Temple by taking appropriate action, which situated in T.S.No.35 PT (Old T.S.No. 6/1) measuring to an extent of 1.81 acres in Block No.93, Ward No.5, Ponmeni, Madurai West Taluk, Madurai, Madurai District, which belong to the Arulmigu Meenakshi Sundareshwarar Temple, Madurai, within the time fixed by this Court.) The prayer in the writ petition reads as follows: ''To issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to restore the Valai Veesi Theppakulam and Kalakovil Temple by taking appropriate action, which situated in T.S.No.35 PT (Old T.S.No. 6/1) measuring to an extent of 1.81 acres in Block No.93 Ward No.5, Ponmeni, Madurai West Taluk, Madurai, Madurai District, which belong to the Arulmigu Meenakshi Sundareshwarar Temple, Madurai, within the time fixed by this Court.'' 2. Mr.Veera Kathiravan, learned counsel appearing for the 8th respondent temple would submit that the temple has already issued notices to the trustees namely, respondents 10 to 12 and 14 to 16. The trustees have also given their reply and it is for the 8th respondent/Executive Officer of the temple to consider the same and pass orders. It is also stated that though the action of the Executive Officer was questioned in W.P(MD)No.1713 of 2023 by some of the trustees, the same was subsequently withdrawn with liberty to forward their explanations to the Executive Officer who will decide the issue. 3. In view of the said factual position, we do not find any reason to keep this Public Interest Litigation pending. The Writ Petition is, therefore, closed since the purpose has been achieved. It will be open to the parties to raise all questions before the Executive Officer who will decide. Learned Deputy Solicitor General appearing for the 3rd respondent would submit that the site in question is not under the control of the 3rd respondent and the same is recorded. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.