S.Sridhar Bhattachariar ... Petitioner in WP.20223/09 N.Parthasarathy Bhattachariar ... Petitioner in WP.20224/09 vs.
1. The Commissioner Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Department 119 Nungambakkam High Road Chennai 600 034.
2. The Joint Commissioner Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Department 119 Nungambakkam High Road Chennai 600 034.
3. Sri Adikesava Perumal Peyalwar Devasthanam, Mylapore Chennai rep. By its Chairman Board of Trustees N.C.Sridhar.
4.C.Rangachari
5.I.V.Anandakumari
6.Ummidi Sudhakar
7.Nathella Narayana Gupta (R.4 to R.7 are the Trustees of R.3) ... Respondents in both Wps.
Writ petitions filed under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a writ of Certiorari as stated therein.
For petitioners : Mr.M.Sundar For respondents : Mr.T.Chandrasekaran Spl.Govt.Pleader for R.1 and R.2 Mr.D.Rajagopal for R.3 to R.7 ..
COMMON ORDER The writ petitioners are the Archagas of Sri Adi Kesava Permual Peyalwar Devasthanam, Mylapore, Chennai, third respondent herein. Against the writ petitioners disciplinary proceedings for grave charges were contemplated and the Trustees of the third respondent temple passed an order on 16.09.2009 placing them under suspension. It was against the said order of suspension passed by the Trustees, the petitioners have filed an appeal under Section 56(2) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act, 1959 (in short, "the Act") within the time stipulated therein. In the appeal, the Joint Commissioner, the second respondent herein, by an order dated 23.09.2009, granted interim stay of the order passed by the Trustees dated 16.09.2009 for a period of two weeks and directed the appeal to be posted for hearing on 07.10.2009. Since, as against the said interim order passed by the second respondent/appellate authority, there is no further appeal available, by invoking the powers under Section 21 of the Act, the Trustees, viz., respondents 3 to 7 filed a revision before the Commissioner, the first respondent herein, which was numbered as R.P.No.59 of 2009. The first respondent, while admitting the revision and directing the same to be posted on 10.11.2009, has suspended the order of the interim stay granted by the second respondent dated 23.09.2009. It is as against the said order passed by the first respondent, the present writ petitions are filed by the petitioners.
2. While Mr.M.Sundar, learned counsel for the petitioners is not questioning the authority of the first respondent in entertaining the revision under Section 21 of the Act as against the order of stay granted by the second respondent under Section 56(2), it is his contention that the appellate authority, viz., the second respondent has entertained the statutory appeal against the order of suspension passed by the Trustees and posted the case on 7.10.2009 and in all fairness, it is improper on the part of the first respondent to suspend the order and post the case on 10.11.2009. He would submit that the second respondent can be directed to dispose of the appeal.
3. On the other hand, Mr.D.Rajagopal, learned counsel appearing for the Trustees, viz., respondents 3 to 7 would submit that after the order of suspension was passed, charges have been framed against the petitioners on 17.09.2009. It is also stated that as against the charges, the petitioners have also submitted their explanations. It is his submission that since explanations have been submitted by the petitioners, respondents 3 to 7 are prepared to complete the enquiry regarding the charges and pass appropriate final orders.
4. Considering the nature of charges, which are framed against the petitioners, relating to the behaviour of the petitioners in raising their voice against the Trustees during the time of poojas and not performing the poojas in time, apart from their failure to adorn necessary jewels to the deities, I am of the view that the respondents/Trustees shall be directed to complete the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioners expeditiously. I am also of the considered view that it is not proper to disturb the petitioners from performing the poojas as Archagas in temple till completion of the disciplinary proceedings initiated by the Trustees against the petitioners. At the same time, the appeal which has been filed by the petitioners against the order of suspension before the second respondent may be directed to be closed, so as to give a quietus to the entire issue by way of final disposal.
5. In such circumstances, the impugned order of the first respondent dated 01.10.2009, is set aside and as consented by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the appeal filed before the second respondent in A.P.No.1 of 2009 stands withdrawn and respondents 3 to 7 are directed to complete the enquiry based on the charges framed against the petitioners by giving sufficient opportunity to them to let in evidence and pass appropriate final orders expeditiously in any event within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It is made clear that the above said order is subject to the condition and on the specific undertaking by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners would cooperate with respondents 3 to 7 in the disciplinary proceedings initiated against them. It is also made clear that till the final orders are passed by the Trustees, the petitioners shall continue to perform the functions as Archagas of the third respondent Temple, subject to the satisfaction of respondents 3 to 7.
6. With the above directions, the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
kh To
1. The Commissioner Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Department 119 Nungambakkam High Road Chennai 600 034.
2. The Joint Commissioner Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Department 119 Nungambakkam High Road Chennai 600 034