Chinnadurai T v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Reserved on

13.06.2024 Delivered on

09.07.2024 CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.8545 & 8546 of 2024 W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 T.Chinnadurai ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Collectorate, Tuticorin District.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruchendur, Tuticorin District.

3.The Tahsildar, Eral Taluk, Tuticorin District.

4.D.Muthukaruppan @ Velayutham

5.D.Rajendran

6.D.Durai

7.D.Vaikunaramasamy @ Kumar ... Respondents Page No. 1 of 38 Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to allow the petitioner to continue his poojariship for the period from 15.05.2024 to

14.09.2024 by considering the petitioner's representation, dated

20.03.2024 within the time limit as fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.K.K.Samy For R1 to R3 : Mr.S.P.Maharajan Special Government Pleader For R4 : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai For R5 & R7 : Mr.H.Lakshmi Shankar for S.Ramesh For R6 : Mr.S.Rajasekar W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024

1.M.Deivathadiyaan @ Manikandan

2.M.Muthukaruppan ... Petitioners Vs.

1.The District Collector, Koramballam, Thoothukudi, Thoothukudi District.

2.The Revenue Tahsildar cum Executive Magistrate, Eral, Eral Taluk, Page No. 2 of 38 Thoothukudi District.

3.Mr.R.Gopalakrishnan,

Presently working as ISRO Land Acquisition Tahsildar, Tiruchendur, Thoothukudi District and Previously working as Revenue Tahsildar cum Executive Magistrate, Eral Taluk, Thoothukudi District.

4.D.Rajendran

5.D.Durai

6.D.Vaikunda Ramasamy @ Kumar

7.T.Chinnadurai

8.M.Kalavathi

9.D.Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings of the second respondent in e.f.M. 2/42/2020 dated 13.01.2024 and quashing the same and issuing a consequential direction to the second respondent to ensure that the annual turn for the year 2024 in respect of 4 months commencing from

14.05.2024 to 16.09.2024 (Vaigaasi, Aani and Aavani which includes Kodaivizha period) is given to the petitioner in Arulmigu Aarumugamangalam Shri Vembadi Sudalaimadaswamy Thirukoil. Page No. 3 of 38 For Petitioners : Mr.N.Dilipkumar For R1 to R3 : Mr.S.P.Maharajan Special Government Pleader For R4 & R6 : Mr.H.Lakshmi Shankar for S.Ramesh For R5 : Mr.S.Rajasekar For R7 : Mr.K.K.Samy For R9 : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai ***** C O M M O N O R D E R By this common order, both these Writ Petitions are being disposed of.

¶2These Writ Petitions have been filed by the respective petitioners for the following relief:- W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 Page No. 4 of 38 For issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent [District Collector, Tuticorin] to allow the petitioner to continue his Poojariship for the period from 15.05.2024 to

14.09.2024 by considering the petitioner's representation dated

20.03.2024 within a time limit as fixed by this Court. For issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records related to the impugned order of the second respondent [The Revenue Tahsildar cum Executive Magistrate, Eral, Eral Taluk, Thoothukudi

District]

dated

13.01.2024 bearing reference No.Na.Ka.Aa2/42/2020 and quashing the same and issuing a consequential direction to the second to ensure that the annual turn for the year 2024 in respect of 4 months commencing from 14.05.2024 to 16.09.2024 (Vaigassi, Aani, Aadi, Aavani which includes Kodaivizha Period) is given to the petitioners in Arulmigu Aarumugammangalam Shri Vembadi Sudalaimadaswamy Thirukoil. 'A' Branch 'C' Branch

¶3Relevant portion of the impunged order dated 13.01.2024 impugned in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 reads as under:- "vdNt> ghu;it 1 Kjy; 7 tiu cs;s Nfhupf;if kDf;fis guprPyid nra;Jk;> ghu;it 8-y; fz;Ls;s =PitFz;lk; tl;lhl;rpaupd; $l;l eltbf;if KbTfspd;gbAk;> ghu;it 11-y; fz;Ls;s khz;gik nrd;id cau;ePjpkd;w Nky;KiwaPl;L tof;fpd; jPu;g;Giuapd;gbAk;> Vuy; tl;lk;> nfhl;lhuf;Fwpr;rp fpuhkk;> MWKfkq;fyk; =Ntk;gb Rliykhlrhkp Nfhtpy; epu;thf

nghWg;gpid

khw;Wtjw;F

gpd;tUkhW cj;jutplg;gLfpwJ. Mz;L Kjy; ehd;F khjk; ,uz;lhtJ ehd;F khjk; %d;whtJ ehd;F khjk; Page No. 5 of 38 W.P.rMi)oNos.9400o&o9404oofo2024 2024 jpUQhdrkg; e; Kj;Jf;fUg;gd; njat; j;jba jk; tifauh vd;w NtyhAjk;> h (v) ij khjk; 1-uhN[e;jpud;> Jiu> kzpfzl; d; k; Njjp itFz;luhkrhkp tifauh Kjy; vd;w Fkhu ; (Gul;lhrp rpj;jpiu (njat; j;jbah khjk; 1k; khjk; Kba gpsi; s Njjp Kjy; thupRfSf;F khuf; op Nkw;fz;l ehd;F khjk; Kba) khjqf; spy; rpj;jpiu khj ,Wjpapy; jpUxiyr;rlP ;L %ykhf Nfhtpy; eput; hf xg;gilg;G KbT nra;agg; Lk;. (itfhrp khjk; 1k; Njjp Kjy; Mtzp khjk; Kba) Nkw;fzl; Row;rp Kiwapd;gb MWKfkq;fyk; =Ntk;gb RliykhlRthkp Nfhtpypy; guk;giu ju;kfu;j;jh nghWg;G kw;Wk; G+i[fs;/tpohf;fs; Kjyhdtw;iw jw;NghJ epu;thfk; elj;jp tUk; jpUitFzl; uhkrhkp vd;gtupd; kfd; jpU.fNzrd; vd;gtu; Row;rp Kiwapd;gb> vjput; Uk; ij khjk; 1-Mk; Njjp (15.01.2024 md;W) =Ntk;gb RliykhlRthkp Nfhtpypy; gukg; iu juk; fu;j;jh nghWg;G kw;Wk; G+i[fs;/tpohf;fs; Kjyhdtwi; w elj;jpl jpU. jpUQhdrkg; e;jk; vd;gtupd; kfd; jpU.rpd;dj;Jiu vd;gtUf;F nghWg;G khw;wp rhtp xgg; ilf;f cj;jutplgg; LfpwJ. Nkw;fzl; Vuy; tll; k;> nfhll; hufF; wpr;rp fpuhkk;> MWKfkqf; yk; =Ntk;gb RliykhlRthkp Nfhtpypy; guk;giu ju;kfu;j;jh nghWg;G kw;Wk; G+i[fs;/tpohf;fs; Kjyhdtw;iw Nkw;fz;l cj;juT Row;rp Kiwapd;gb Nfhtpy; nghWgg; pid Vw;W eput; hfk; elj;jTk;> rll; k;> xOqF; gpur;rpid Vw;glh tz;zk>; Nfhtpy; epu;thfj;jpid elj;jplTk; NkYk;> Nkw;fz;l cj;jutpy; fz;l Row;rp Kiwapy; kl;LNk Nfhtpy; eput; hfj;ij khw;w Ntz;Lk; vdj; njuptpj;Jk;> mt;thW elf;f kWj;jhy; caue; Pjpkd;w mtkjpgG; f;F css; hfp fLikahd rl;l eltbfi; f vLff; g;gLk; vdTk; PageoNo.o6oofoa8 njuptpj;J ,jd; %yk; cj;jutplg;gLfpwJ. NkYk;> Nkw;fz;l cj;jutpy; VNjDk; Ml;Nrgiz ,Uf;Fk;gl;rj;jpy;

Nky;KiwaPl;L

mYtyuhd jpUr;nre;J}u;> tUtha; Nfhl;lhl;rpau; mtu;fsplk; kD nra;J

cupa

gupfhuk;

Njbf;

nfhs;s njuptpf;fg;gLfpwJ." 'A' Branch - The petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 & the 7th respondent in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 'B' Branch - The 4th to 7th respondents in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 & the 4th to 6th & 9th respondents in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 'C' Branch - The petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024

¶4The petitioners herein along with others are descendants of Deivathadiya Pillai (Senior). For the sake of clarity, a family tree is given below:- Page No. 7 of 38 'A' Branch : Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai and his descendants 'B' Branch : Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) and his descendants 'C' Branch : Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai and his descendants Ganesan Group : Adopted son of Vaikundaramasamy Pillai [other son of Deivathadiya Pillai (Senior)

¶5There is a long pending dispute between two wings of Senior Deivathadiya Pillai namely, Vaikunda Muthukaruppan Pillai and Ramaswamy Pillai since 2002. The said dispute pertains to the rights to conduct the temple festival in the subject temple namely, Sri Vembadi Sudalaimada Swamy Temple at Arumugamangalm, Eral, Thoothukudi Page No. 8 of 38 District.

¶6Disputes are pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. They arise out of the Judgment and Decree dated 14.09.2005 passed in O.S.No. 182 of 2002. O.S.No.182 of 2022 was filed by Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai 'A' Branch before the District Munsif Court, Srivaikuntam, for a declaratory relief. The said suit was dismissed by the District Munsif Court, Srivaikuntam. In the said suit, a counter claim was filed by the father of the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 namely, Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai 'C' Branch. The counter claim was also dismissed by the District Munsif Court, Srivaikuntam, by its Judgment and Decree dated 14.09.2005.

¶7Aggrieved by the same, two appeals came to be filed before the Additional Subordinate Court, Tuticorin in A.S.No.93 of 2007 by 'A' Branch viz., Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai [the father of the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024] and A.S.No.9 of 2008 by 'C' Branch viz., Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai [the father of the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No. 9404 of 2024]. The decision of the Trial Court was reversed by the Additional Subordinate Court, Tuticorin by its Judgment and Decree Page No. 9 of 38 dated 26.04.2012.

¶8Aggrieved by the same, the four sons of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) ['B' branch] namely Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham, Rajendran, Sudalaimuthu @ Durai and Vaikundaramasamy @ Kumar filed S.A.(MD) Nos.458 & 597 of 2012. Both the Second Appeals were dismissed by this Court on 12.09.2014.

¶9Aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree dated 12.09.2014 in S.A.

(MD) Nos.458 & 597 of 2012, two appeals are pending at the behest of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) ['B' branch] named above before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.L.P.(Civil) Nos.29755 & 29756 of 2014.

¶10The dispute in these Writ Petitions is confined to the inter-se rights to conduct temple festival between grandsons of Muthukaruppan Pillai through his (1) first son Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) ['B' Branch],

(2) third son Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai ['A' Branch] and (3) fourth son Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai ['C' Branch]. One of the sons of Muthukaruppan Pillai namely, Ramasamy Pillai has no claims over rights. Page No. 10 of 38

¶11The descendants of Deivathadiya Pillai (Senior) through his first son Muthukaruppa Pillai representing three branches namely, Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai ['A' Branch], Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) ['B' Branch], and four sons and Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai ['C' Branch] approached the Tahsildar. In a peace committee meeting held on

13.01.2016, the Tahsildar had recorded an interim arrangement to be followed by three branches namely A, B & C pending final resolution of the dispute by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. As per the decision of the aforesaid Peace Committee, the right to worship is on rational basis.

¶12The relevant portion of the interim arrangement agreed upon between them before the Executive Magistrate/Tahsildar reads as under:- "$l;lj;jpy; fPo;fz;l fUj;Jf;fs; tpthjpf;fg;gl;ld

1.KjyhtJ> %d;W jug;gpdUk; jkJ jug;Gf;F jyh ehd;F khjk; vd;gij Vw;Wf; nfhs;fpwhh;fsh vd;gJ Fwpj;J fUj;J Nfhug;gl;ljpy;> %d;W jug;gpdUk; jyh ehd;F khjk; vd;gij Vw;Wf; nfhs;tjhf rk;kjk; njhptpj;jdh;.

2.jkf;Fs; Ngrp cld;ghL Vw;gLj;jpl tha;g;G mspf;fg;gl;ljpy;

jkf;Fs;

Ngrpf;nfhs;s Ntz;bajpy;iy vd njhptpj;jjhy;> ,k;Kaw;rp iftplg;gl;lJ.

3.%d;W jug;gpdUk; MWKfkq;fyk; mUs;kpF =Ntk;gb RliykhlRthkp jpUf;Nfhtpy; G+i[ ifq;fh;aq;fis nra;J tUtjhy; Nkw;gb Rthkpia Ntz;b jpUTsr;rPl;L vOjp mjd; mbg;gilapy; KjyhtJ egh;> ,uz;lhtJ egh; kw;Wk; %d;whtJ egh; KbT nra;tJ njhlh;ghf %d;W jug;gpdhplKk; Page No. 11 of 38 Nfhug;gl;ljpy;

jpUTsr;rPl;L

Kiwia

Vw;Wf; nfhs;tjhfj; njhptpj;jdh;.

4.NkYk;>

jpUTsr;rPl;L

Kiwapy; Kjy;> ,uz;lhtJ> %d;whtJ egh; KbT nra;J> 2016k; Mz;L 1> 2> 3 vd;w thpirapYk;> 2018k; Mz;L 2> 3> 1 vd;w thpirapYk;> 2020k; Mz;L 3> 1> 2 vd;w thpirapYk;

nghWg;G

Vw;W

elj;jyhk; vd;W> ,t;thpirapy; jyh ehd;F khjq;fs; nghWg;G Vw;Fk;NghJ> %d;W jug;gpdUf;Fk; nfhil elj;Jk; tha;g;G fpilf;Fk; vd;w tpguk; $wg;gl;L> %d;W jug;gpduhYk; Vw;Wf; nfhs;sg;gl;lJ.

5.NkYk;> ,J njhlh;ghf cr;rePjpkd;wj;jpy; njhlug;gl;Ls;s tof;fpy; toq;fg;gLk; jPh;g;gpd; mbg;gilapy;

Nkw;fz;lthW

tpthjpf;fg;gl;l eilKiwfs; jPh;g;gpd; mbg;gilapy; khWghl;Lf;FhpaJ vd;gJk; vLj;Jf; $wg;gl;L> midtuhYk; Vw;Wf; nfhs;sg;gl;lJ. NkYk;> xt;nthU ehd;F khjKk; KbTw;wJk;> nghWg;ig epiwT nra;Ak; jug;gpdh; mLj;J nghWg;G Vw;Fk; jug;gpdUf;F vt;tpj gpur;ridAk; ,d;wp nghWg;ig Xg;gilf;f Ntz;Lk; vdTk;> mjpy; VJk; gpur;rid vOe;jhy; rl;lg;gb eltbf;if vLf;fg;gLk; vd;gJk; midtUf;Fk; $wg;gl;lJ. Nkw;gb tptuq;fs; midj;J jug;gpduhYk; Vw;Wf; nfhs;sg;gl;L ifnahg;gkplg;gl;lJ. ,jidj; njhlh;e;J jpUTsr;rPl;L vOjg;gl;L> FYf;fg;gl;ljpy;>

gpd;tUkhW

jpUTsr;rPl;L fpilf;fg;gl;L thpirg;gLj;jg;gl;lJ.

1.jpU.jpUQhdrk;ge;jk;gps;is tifawh

2.jpU.Kj;Jf;fUg;gd; (v) NtyhAjk; tifawh

3.jpU.nja;tjbahd; (v) kzpfz;ld; kw;Wk; jpU.vk;.Kj;Jf;fUg;gd; tifawh mjd;gb

ij

1k;

ehs;

(15-01-2016) jpU.jpUQhdrk;ge;jk;gps;is

tifawh

Nfhtpy; nghWg;G Vw;f Ntz;Lk;. Nkw;gb egh; itfhrp 1-k; ehs; jpU.Kj;Jf;fUg;gd; (v) NtyhAjk; tifawhtplk; nghWg;ig xg;gilf;f Ntz;Lk;. Gul;lhrp 1-k; ehs; jpU.nja;tjbahd;

(v)

kzpfz;ld;

kw;Wk; jpU.vk;.Kj;Jf;fUg;gd;

tifawhtplk; jpU.Kj;Jf;fUg;gd; (v) NtyhAjk; tifawhtpdh; nghWg;ig

xg;gilf;f

Ntz;Lk;.

,k;Kiwfs; KbTw;wJk; mLj;j ij 1-k; ehs; 2017 Mk; Mz;L fNzrd; tifawh Nfhtpy; nghWg;G Vw;f Ntz;Lk;. " Page No. 12 of 38

¶13Thus, the parties hereto are entitled to conduct temple festival from the year 2016 onwards on turns. A set of arrangement has been arrived at by dividing an English Year corresponding to Tamil Calender Year into 4 months starting from 15th January and ending with 14th January of the ensuing years.

¶14Thus, the descendants of Muthukaruppan Pillai are entitled to manage the affairs of the temple and conduct the temple festival during even years, whereas, the Ganesan Group, the adopted son of Vaikunda Ramasamy Pillai and his wife Gandhimathiammal are entitled to manage the affairs of the temple and conduct the temple festival during odd years. The said Muthukaruppan Pillai has four sons. One of them has waived his rights.

¶15Therefore, the descendants of Muthukaruppan Pillai through other three sons are entitled to manage the affairs of the temple and conduct the temple festival during even years. The even years were divided into three parts, so that, the three Branches of Muthukaruppan Pillai through his sons/grandsons can conduct the temple festival on Page No. 13 of 38 rotational basis.

¶16As per the interim arrangement, they are entitled to manage the affairs of the temple and conduct the temple festival. For clarity, the following chat is given below:- Year 1st four months 2nd four months 3rd four months 2016 A B C 2017 Ganeshan Group * 2018 B C A 2019 Ganeshan Group * 2020 C A B 2021 Ganesh Group * 2022 A B C 2023 Ganesh Group * 2024 B C A Note:- 1st four months : ij - rpj;jpiu [15th of January - 14th of May approximately] 2nd four months : itfhrp - Mtzp [15th of May - 14th of September approximately] 3rd four months : Gul;lhrp - khHfop [15th of September - 14th of January approximately]

¶17The background of the dispute between the parties is on account Page No. 14 of 38 of changes in 2022. As per the above table, the actual sequence should have been "ABC" i.e., the first four months for 'A' Branch, second four months for 'B' Branch and third four months for 'C' Branch respectively. Instead of sequence "ABC" for 2022, the sequence that was followed in 2022 was "BAC".

¶18The elder son of Devathadiya Pillai (Junior) namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham deviated and usurped the first four months of 2022 to the exclusion not only his brothers but also 'A' Branch the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024. A representation was made to the Tahsildar to ameliorate the situation as there were disputes.

¶19Pursuant to the representation of the elder son of Devathadiya Pillai (Junior) namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham, a notice was issued to the other wing namely, Ganesan, the adopted son of Vaikunda Ramasamy Pillai and his wife Gandhimathiammal, the other son of Deivathadiayan Pillai (Senior). The said notice was challenged by the said Ganesan before this Court in W.P.(MD) No.12740 of 2021.

¶20By an order dated 15.12.2021, the said Writ Petition was Page No. 15 of 38 disposed of with the observation that the arrangement has to continue till

14.01.2022. Thereafter, in the manner and the procedure which was adopted, the rights may be handed over to the said Vellayutham @ Muthukaruppan Pillai, who was to be the hereditary trustee, either by himself or with anybody who is aligned with him continue to perform pooja and other activities with respect to the temple till 14.01.2023. Thereafter, once again the arrangement was to revert back to the petitioner and his group. The Tahsildar was directed to ensure that there was peace insofar as worship in the temple was concerned.

¶21Since the said Writ Petition was disposed of without involving the rest of the members of Branch A, B & C through Muthukaruppan Pillai, the issue came up before the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.

(MD) Nos.10, 28 & 76 of 2022. The Court after taking note of the conduct of Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham, the elder son of Devathadiya Pillai (Junior) of 'B' Branch, passed the following orders on

11.07.2022:- "5.The interim arrangement continued even thereafter, which is seen from the order in the W.P.

(MD)No.17426 of 2018, dated 10.08.2018. It is to be noted that Velayutham @ Muthukaruppan claims exclusive right to perform pooja and other services for a period of four months in every turn of two years Page No. 16 of 38 representing the branch of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) without an adjudication or a decision by any authority or forum so far. It is submitted before this Court by the other sons of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) that each one of them are also performing pooja and other services exclusively for a period of one month in every turn. In the said background, Velayutham @ Muthukaruppan approached the Tahsildar to declare him as hereditary trustee of temple. It is an attempt by the third respondent in the Writ Appeal to get an order behind the members of his own branch. In response to a representation of Velayutham @ Muthukaruppan, a notice was issued to the Writ Petitioner and Velayutham @ Muthukaruppan by the Tahsildar. This notice that was issued to the Writ Petitioner was put to challenge in the Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.12740 of 2021.

6.The learned Single Judge while disposing of the Writ Petition, appears to be under the impression that the dispute is between the two branches of Writ Petitioner/first respondent and the third respondent. Aggrieved by the order in the Writ Petition, the above three appeals have been preferred by the members of other branches and the brothers of Velayutham @ Muthukaruppan, who are entitled to perform pooja and other services in the temple as per the turn system.

7.All the parties have admitted before this Court that the order impugned in the Writ Appeals cannot be sustained, as the learned Single Judge has not considered the facts and proceedings, recognising/recording the rights of all parties, which are referred to by this Court in various proceedings. In such circumstances, this Court has no hesitation to hold that the impugned order of Writ Court cannot be sustained. Going by the records, this Court is also convinced that all the four sons of Deivathadiya Pillai Page No. 17 of 38 (Junior) are entitled to perform pooja and other services in accordance with the turn system, as directed by the Tahsildar in 2016 and subsequently, in 2018 pursuant to a peace committee meeting. It is made clear that the third respondent in these appeals, namely, the second respondent in the Writ Petition, has no exclusive right to perform pooja and other services during the four months period representing Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) branch. The four months which should be allotted to the branch of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior), will be shared by Rajendran,

Sudalaimuthu

@

Durai Vaikundaramasamy @ Kumar and Velayutham @ Muthukaruppan equally. This arrangement will remain and continue to be in force till the disposal of the Civil Appeal filed as against the judgment of this Court in the two second appeals.

8.Since the issue was not before the Court with regard to the rights of Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai and Thirugnanasambandam, it is made clear that the right to perform pooja and other services for a period of four months as per the turn system which is recognised in favour of the heirs of Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai and Thirugnanasambantham cannot be interfered with and hence, this Court recognises and sustain the rights of all parties, as it was decided by the Tahsildar pursuant to the peace committee meeting, which was followed subsequently in 2018.

9.It is now admitted that the poojariship and other services have to be rendered by Thiruganasambatham, representing the third branch, and his right to perform the same till the end of Avani (month) will be intact. Thirugnanasambantham shall handover the keys to the heirs of Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai, by the end of Aavani. It is also admitted that the turn system should be strictly adhered to. Since one year is calculated from Thai to Page No. 18 of 38 Margazhi, Ganesan is entitled to perform pooja and other services after completion of four months by the heirs of Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai by the end of Margazhi. The members, who are parties in the above appeals shall keep it in mind that the order of this Court recognising the practice followed so far should be strictly adhered to. Any person, who creates problems to any other branch shall be liable to be prosecuted for contempt of Court.

10.It is the grievance of the other heirs of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior), namely, Rajendran, Sudalaimuthu @ Durai, Vaikundaramasamy @ Kumar, that Velayutham @ Muthukaruppan, one of the sons of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior), was performing pooja and other services for the entire four months, that have to be shared by all the heirs of Deivathadiya Pillai Junior. Therefore, a request is made that Velayutham @ Muthukaruppan should be kept away from the pooja and other services for the next six years. It is open to the heirs of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior), either to agree for a workable solution mutually or approach the Civil Court for appropriate orders in case the issue cannot be decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court.

11.In view of the order passed by this Court, when an issue is addressed before the Executive Magistrate or Police Officials in relation to the affairs of the temple, they shall keep in mind the order of this Court, so that the arrangement will not be disturbed or modified under the guise of law and order issue, at the instance of any third party or any one of the parties to these appeals.

12.With the above directions, these Writ Appeals are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed." Page No. 19 of 38

¶22As per 2016 arrangements, the correct sequence for 2024 would have been 'BCA'. It is the case of the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 ['C' Branch], that the Tahsildar in the impugned order dated

13.01.2024 has allowed the same sequence which was to be followed originally during 2022, whereas, the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 ['C' Branch] would be entitled to conduct temple festival only during the period starting from 5th May, 2024 upto 14th September, 2024 which is the peak period for the temple festival during year.

¶23It is submitted by Mr.N.Dilipkumar for 'C' Branch [the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024], that 'C' Branch has the rights to conduct the temple festival during the Tamil Calender Month starting from Vaikasi (itfhrp) and ending with Aavani (Mtzp) in 2024 [15th May - 14th September] and this turn comes once in 6 years. It is submitted that the temple festival was allowed during the peak season for 'C' Branch last in 2018. This rights has been wrongly conferred on 'B' branch namely, 4 sons of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) vide the impugned order contrary to the order dated 11.07.2022 of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD) Nos.10, 28 & 76 of 2022. Page No. 20 of 38

¶24It is submitted that there was no fault on 'C' Branch viz., the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 and the impugned order of the Tahsildar made this allocation and changed the sequence contrary to the decision of the Division Bench of this Court. Particularly, the learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 would submit that in paragraphs 10 & 11 of the order dated 11.07.2022 in W.A.(MD) Nos.10, 28 & 76 of 2022, the Hon'ble Division Bench has categorically stated that inter se dispute between 'B' branch i.e., sons of Devathadiya Pillai (Junior) has to be worked out in a Civil Court and that the Tahsildar has to keep in mind the order of the Court in the said Writ Appeals as also the arrangements that was made between parties from 2016. Subsequently, a reference is made to paragraphs 8 & 11 of the Judgment which have been extracted above.

¶25Defending the impugned order of the Tahsildar dated

13.01.2024, Mr.H.Lakshmi Sankar appearing for the other three sons of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) 'B' branch would submit that the arrangements was disturbed by their elder brother Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham during 2022. He had usurped the term of the first turn of Page No. 21 of 38 T.Chinnadurai 'A' Branch [the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024] during 2022, which was rectified by castelling the position by allowing 'A' Branch to take up the second turn during 2022 i.e., between 15th May to 14th September, 2022.

¶26It is submitted that it would not mean that what was followed in 2022 should be allowed to be followed without required deviation. It is therefore submitted that the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024, sons of Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai ['C' branch] had consented before the Division Bench which was not challenged even though the rights stood vested with 'B' Branch during 2022.

¶27It is submitted that merely because their elder brother had encroached the rights of 'A' Branch namely, T.Chinnadurai, the son of Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai [petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024] ipso facto would not mean that deviation in 2022 should not be corrected in 2024.

¶28The learned counsel for the younger sons of Deivathadiyan Pillai (Junior) Mr.Lakshmi Shankar would draw attention to ground 10 in Page No. 22 of 38 the affidavit filed in support of W.A.(MD) No.28 of 2022 against the order dated 15.12.2021 passed in W.P.(MD) No.12740 of 2021 which reads as under:- "10. The Learned Judge failed to see that as per the terms of the peace committee meeting dated

12.01.2018 and 25.06.2018, the 1st Respondent herein should handover the rights of the temple to one Thirugnanasampantham from 1st Thai 2022, who in turn handover the rights to the Appellant 1st Vaigasi 2022, and the 3rd Respondent herein and his brothers are entitled for the rights from 1st Protasi 2022, who shall handover the rights to the 1st Respondent herein from 1st Thai 2023."

¶29The learned counsel for the younger sons of Deivathadiyan Pillai (Junior) would further submit that the right of the writ petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 ['C' Branch] is not affected, if as per the present turn, the younger sons of Deivathadiyan Pillai (Junior) namely, Rajendran, Sudalaimuthu @ Durai and Vaikundaramasamy @ Kumar are entitled to conduct the Kodai Vizha (nfhil tpoh) during the present year (2024) and the writ petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 ['C' Branch] will get their rights to conduct the festival in 2026.

¶30He would further submit that taking advantage of the order Page No. 23 of 38 passed by this Court dated 15.12.2021 in W.P.(MD) No.12740 of 2021, the eldest son of Deivathadiyan Pillai (Junior) namely, Velayutham Pillai @ Muthukaruppan Pillai had disrupted the normal cycle and took the charge during Thai (ij) in 2022, resulting in cascading changes for subsequent years. Therefore, the year 2022 should be considered as a first in the cycle year and the advantage derived by Group 'A' by conducting the Kodai Vizha in 2020 should be considered in the background of covid-restrictions celebration of festival.

¶31The learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 T.Chinnadurai, S/o.Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai 'A' Branch would submit that before the interim arrangement was made in the year 2016, the parties were also following a turn system consistently, as per which, Ganesan was authorized to perform pooja etc., biannually. Remaining 3 Branches including the petitioner's Branch i.e., 'A' Branch divided 4 months each in a year. It is submitted that that 'A' Branch i.e., the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 and his father Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai were deprived their rights to perform pooja during the period between 15.05.2014 to 14.09.2014 and was enjoyed by 'B' Branch i.e., Deivathadiyan Pillai (Junior) and his sons. Therefore, to compensate Page No. 24 of 38 the loss of turn, the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 T.Chinnadurai should be given a chance to perform the pooja during the year between 15.05.2024 and 14.09.2024 as 'B' Branch is going to take over the charge for that period.

¶32He would further submit that the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No. 9400 of 2024 T.Chandran sent a representation dated 20.03.2024 to the third respondent Tahsildar, Eral Taluk. Since the said representation did not evoke any response, the petitioner filed the present W.P.(MD) No. 9400 of 2024 seeking for a direction to the first respondent District Collector, Tuticorin District to allow him to continue his poojariship for the period from 15.05.2024 to 14.09.2024 by considering his representation dated 20.03.2024.

¶33I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the private respondents and the learned Special Government Pleader for the official respondents.

¶34Before dealing with the case of the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No. Page No. 25 of 38 9404 of 2024, I shall first dispose of W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 filed by T.Chinnadurai, S/o.Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai ['A' Branch].

¶35The petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of the 2024 [T.Chinnadurai, S/o.Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai ('A' Branch)] is seeking compensation for the loss caused to his father during the period between 15.05.2014 and 14.09.2014. However, much water has flowed since then. This prayer is contrary to the interim arrangement agreed upon between parties in the year 2016. The interim arrangement has also received the seal of approval partly in the order of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(MD) No.12740 of 2021 and in the order of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court dated 11.07.2022 passed in W.A.(MD) Nos. 10, 28 & 76 of 2022.

¶36Therefore, there is no scope for entertaining the prayer of the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024, T.Chinnadurai, S/o.Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai. Thus, W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 is liable to be dismissed. That apart, during 2022 also, the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No. 9400 of 2024 [T.Chinnadurai, S/o.Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai ('A' Branch)] had the benefit of conducting the temple festival during peak Page No. 26 of 38 season for the temple during the Tamil Calender Month starting from Vaikasi (itfhrp) and ending with Aavani (Mtzp) in 2024 [15th May - 14th September]. Therefore, the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 namely T.Chinnadurai, S/o.Thirugnana Sambantham Pillai ['A' Branch] cannot as for repetition once again this year. Therefore, W.P.(MD) No. 9400 of 2024 is liable to be dismissed.

¶37As far as W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 is concerned, as mentioned above, there is a long pending dispute between descendants of Deivathadiya Pillai (Senior) through his sons namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai and Vaikunda Ramasamy Pillai. The issue is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶38Since the temple festival has to go on, an interim arrangement was agreed upon before the Executive Magistrate cum Tahsildar on

13.01.2016, content of which has been extracted above, between the three brothers and their descendants through Muthukaruppan Pillai and Ganesan, the adopted son of Vaikunda Ramasamy Pillai and his wife Gandhimathiammal. Page No. 27 of 38

¶39There was a deviation in the arrangement by Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham, the eldest son of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) ['B' Branch]. This was during the period when the temples were under the lock down due to the Covid-19 Pandemic.

¶40Court is taking judicial cognizance of the fact that in 2020, w.e.f. 24.03.2020, the above interim arrangement as per the Executive Magistrate cum Tahsildar's order dated 13.01.2016 could not be followed in the sequence of 'CAB' due to the out break of Covid-19 Pandemic. W.e.f. 24.03.2020, restrictions were in place due to Notifications issued under the Disaster Management Act, 2005. The temple as also other public places were inaccessible. Worship in the temple in 2020 also would have been completely suspended for the whole of the year after

24.03.2020.

¶41There were large scale disruptions and frustrations. The interim arrangement of the Executive Magistrate cum Tahsildar dated 13.01.2016 stood suspended during the period starting from 24.03.2020 till the end of 2021. In the legal parlance, the frustration is equaled with 'Act of God'. There would have been completely washed, frustrating the interim Page No. 28 of 38 arrangements agreed upon between the parties before the Executive Magistrate cum Tashildar on 13.01.2016.

¶42In fact, the other Wing of Deivathadiya Pillai (Senior) namely, Ganesan, the adopted son of Vaikundaramasamy Pillai and his wife Gandhimathiammal, whose turn fell for the period starting from 15th January, 2021 to 14th January, 2022 would have also been denied the rights to manage the affairs of the temple during the aforementioned period due to the lock down imposed by the Government on account of outbreak of Covid-19 which was partially restored by the order dated

15.12.2021 in W.P.(MD) No.12740 of 2021.

¶43The petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 namely, Deivathadiyan @ Manikandan and Muthukaruppan, sons of Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai ['C' Branch], on the other hand, had benefited during the first two months of 2020 till 24.03.2020. The petitioners in W.P.(MD) No. 9404 of 2024 would have lost 52 days out of 120 days in 2020. The same petitioners also had benefit to manage the temple during the last four months during 2022 till 14.01.2023. It is the eldest son of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Vellayutham who Page No. 29 of 38 usurped the position of Ganesan, S/o.Vaikunda Ramasamy Pillai. Rights of Ganesan, S/o.Vaikunda Ramasamy Pillai was restored vide order dated

15.12.2021 in W.P.(MD) No.12740 of 2021.

44.The eldest son of Deivathadiya Pillai (Jr.) i.e., Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham usurped the turn during the first four months in 2021 which should have actually gone to said Ganesh, S/o. Vaikundaramasamy Pillai perhaps on account of the disruption due to the closure of the temples during December 2020, to the exclusion of his brothers.

¶45It is in this background, Ganesan who was otherwise entitled to right during odd years stating from 15th January to 14th January in the ensuring year challenged the notice dated 07.07.2021 of the Tahsildar, Eral Taluk bearing reference No.Aa2/847/2019 issued pursuant to the representation given by the eldest son of Deivathadiya Pillai (junior) namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham, in W.P.(MD) No.12740 of 2021. The aforesaid notice was merely issued to the Ganesan, the adopted son of Vaikundaramasamy Pillai. It was in the background the said Writ Petition was disposed of on 15.12.2021 with the following observations:- Page No. 30 of 38 "10.Let me not escalate the issue any further, but interfere with the order of the first respondent and permit the petitioner herein to continue to perform pooja in the manner the poojas have to be performed in that particular temple and collect emoluments from the poojas. This arrangement should continue till

14.01.2022. Thereafter, in the manner and the procedure which is adopted, the rights may be handed over to the second respondent/Vellayutham @ Muthukaruppan Pillai, who may as hereditary trustee, either by himself or with anybody who is aligned with him continue to perform pooja and other activities with respect to the temple till 14.01.2023. Thereafter, once again the entire role would revert back to the petitioner and his group.

11.Let that arrangement continue in the aforesaid manner and if at all there is a law and order problem or any controversy between the two groups, which I hope would not arise, and I further hope that the petitioner and the second respondent would be mature enough to avoid, the first respondent/The Tahsildar must enter into the fray and ensure that peace runs insofar as worship in the temple is concerned. But let such interference be only in exceptional circumstances and not as a rule.

12.With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is also closed."

¶46Thus, the said Ganesan was permitted to continue to perform pooja in the manner till 14.01.2022 and thereafter, in the manner and the procedure which is adopted, the rights has to be handed over to the eldest Page No. 31 of 38 son of Deivathadiya Pillai (junior) namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham. Thus, the Court has rightly restored the position as far as Ganesan, the adopted son of Vaikundaramasamy Pillai and his wife Gandhimathi Ammal.

¶47However, instead of following the sequence 'ABC' in 2022, the Court in its order dated 15.12.2021 in W.P.(MD) No.12740 of 2021 directed the rights to be handed over to the eldest son of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham from

15.01.2022. Thus, W.A.(MD) Nos.10, 28 & 76 of 2022 came to be filed before the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court by following persons:- Branch W.A.

(MD) No Name of Appellant W.P.(MD) No. Name of the Petitioner 'A' Branch 10/2022 M.Thirugnanasambandam Pillai 9400/2024 T.Chinnadurai, S/o.Thiruganansam bandam Pillai 'C' Branch 28/2022 M.Deivathadiyan

@ Manikandan 9404/2024 1.M.Deivathadiyan @ Manikandan

2.Muthukaruppan 'B' Branch * 76/2022 1.Rajendran

2.Sudalaimuthu @ Durai

3.Vaikunda Ramasamy Pillai @ Kumar - - * Other son of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) R5 to R7 in W.P.(MD) No.9400/24 & R4 to R6 in W.P.(MD) No.9404/24 Page No. 32 of 38

¶48It is under these circumstances, the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court had passed its order on 11.07.2022, content of which has been extracted above. By the said order, the rights of the parties was balanced.

¶49Thus, on the date of aforesaid order dated 11.07.2022, it was agreed that Thirugnanasambantham Pillai, i.e. 'A' Branch now represented by his son T.Chinnadurai, the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9400 of 2024 shall perform the rights till the end of 'Avani' [Mtzp] i.e., during the second fourth months starting from 15th May, 2022 and ending with 14th September, 2022 and thereafter, the said Thirugnanasambantham Pillai was to hand over the keys to the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 [Deivathaiyan @ Manikandan and Muthurkaruppan, S/o.Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai (Branch)].

¶50Thus, the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 have not lost a single turn as compared to others. Due to the disruptions on account of outbreak of Covid-19 Pandemic, both the 'A' Branch [the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024] and 'B' Branch lost their rights during 2020. In 2022, there was a wrong usurpation of the rights of 'A' Page No. 33 of 38 Branch namely, T.Chinnadurai, S/o.Thirugnanasambantham Pillai, by the eldest son of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham. This was set right by the Hon'ble Division Bench in the above-mentioned order dated 11.07.2022 in W.A.(MD) No.10, 28 & 76 of 2022.

¶51Thus, the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 have not lost the turn. Due to the disruptions on account of outbreak of Covid-19 Pandemic, both the 'A' Branch and 'B' Branch have lost their rights during 2020. In 2022, there was a wrong usurpation by the eldest son of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham by usurping the rights of 'A' Branch namely, T.Chinnadurai, S/o.Thirugnanasambantham Pillai. This was adjusted by the Hon'ble Division Bench in the above order dated 11.07.2022 in W.A.(MD) No.10, 28 & 76 of 2022.

¶52The turn to conduct the temple festival during the second spell i.e., 15th May to 14th September [itfhrp - Mtzp] which also comes once in 6 months should go to the 'B' Branch, sons of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior). Page No. 34 of 38

¶53The fact remains that 'A' Branch did not get the chance in 2020. However, 'A' Branch got the chance in 2022 during 'Avani' [Mtzp] i.e., during the second fourth months starting from 15th May, 2022 and ending with 14th September, 2022. Therefore, the next turn during this season would come to 'B' Branch and thereafter to 'C' Branch. Thus, the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 can be given rights during 2026. The current season rightly stands vested with legal heirs/sons of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) namely, Muthukaruppan Pillai @ Velayutham, Rajendran, Sudalaimuthu @ Durai and Vaikundaramasamy @ Kumar.

¶54Therefore, W.P.(MD) No.9404 of 2024 is liable to be dismissed as the rights of the parties have been recognized by the second respondent namely Revenue Tahsildar cum Executive Magistrate, Eral, Eral Taluk, Thoothukudi District vide impugned order dated 13.01.2024 bearing reference No.Na.Ka.Aa2/42/2020.

¶55It is however open for the four brothers i.e., sons of Deivathadiya Pillai (Junior) to work out their inter-se rights between them Page No. 35 of 38 as was ordered by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.07.2022 in W.A.(MD) Nos.10, 28 & 76 of 2022.

¶56However, liberty is given to the petitioners in W.P.(MD) No. 9404 of 2024 to pursue the remedy independently before the Division Bench of this Court in Cont.P.(MD) No.833 of 2024, which was filed for non-compliance of the order dated 11.07.2022 in W.A.(MD) Nos.10, 28 & 76 of 2022.

¶57In the result, both these Writ Petitions are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

09.07.2024 (2/2) Index: Yes / No Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order JEN Copy To:

1.The District Collector, Page No. 36 of 38 Collectorate, Tuticorin District.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruchendur, Tuticorin District.

3.The Tahsildar, Eral Taluk, Tuticorin District.

4.The Revenue Tahsildar cum Executive Magistrate, Eral, Eral Taluk, Thoothukudi District.

5.Mr.R.Gopalakrishnan, ISRO Land Acquisition Tahsildar, Tiruchendur, Thoothukudi District. Page No. 37 of 38 C.SARAVANAN

, J.

JEN Pre-Delivery order Common made in and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.8545 & 8546 of 2024

09.07.2024 (2/2) Page No. 38 of 38