K.Ravikumar v. The Joint Commissioner

ORDER This writ petition has been filed seeking to direct the respondent to number and take on file the petitioner's application dated 17.06.2025.

¶2Mr.K.Karthikeyan, learned Government Advocate takes notice on behalf of the respondent. In view of the consent expressed by the learned counsel on either side, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶3The case of the petitioner is that he made an application before the respondent seeking recognition as Hereditary Trustee. However, the said application of the petitioner has been returned as not maintainable on

17.07.2025, even without numbering and despite the said application being represented on 19.08.2025, till date, no order has been passed. Hence, the petitioner has come up with the present Writ petition.

¶4Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, it would suffice, if this Court issues a direction to the respondent to number the petitioner's original application dated 17.06.2025, which was re-presented on

19.08.2025 and pass appropriate orders on merits as expeditiously as possible.

¶5Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent submitted that, the respondent, vide order dated 17.07.2025 has already rejected the petitioner's application and there is no merit in this Writ petition filed seeking a mandamus for consideration of the petitioner's application, without challenging the above said rejection order passed by the respondent.

¶6I have heard the learned counsel on either side and I have also gone through the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition.

¶7The communication of the respondent in N.Dis.No.4917/2025/B1 dated 17.07.2025 only returns the petitioner's application and the petitioner's application has not been rejected as contended by the learned Government Advocate. However, it is always open to the respondent to hear the petitioner and after giving an opportunity by way of personal hearing, the respondent can thereafter decide even the maintainability of the application and pass orders on merits instead of returning the same at the initial numbering stage.

¶8In view of the above, this Court directs the respondent to consider the petitioner's application dated 17.06.2025 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after affording an opportunity by way of personal hearing to the petitioner including the representation by the learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner to address the issue with regard to the maintainability of the application under Section 63(b) of Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959.

¶9Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

25.10.2025 skt Index : Yes/No Speaking order : Yes/No NCC : Yes/No To: The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Admn. Department, Coimbatore.

P.B. BALAJI, J. skt

25.10.2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 25.10.2025 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI K.Ravikumar ...Petitioner Vs. The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Admn. Department, Coimbatore. ...Respondent Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to number the Original Application dated 17.06.2025 filed under Section 63(b) of Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 in respect of Arulmigu Dharmalingeshwaraswamy Temple, Madhukarai, Coimbatore District. For Petitioner : Mr.T.S.Vijaya Raghavan For Respondent : Mr.K.Karthikeyan, Government Advocate (HR & CE)