COMMISSIONER OF HINDU RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS ADMN DEPARTMENT MADRAS Vs. VAIDYANATHA GURUKKAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question, which is debatable, and which arises for our consideration in this case is, whether the poojari/ archaka/ gurukkal can also be a trustee of a temple" How far the Act or poojari is justified or recognised in playing the role of poojari and trustee or a temple as well"

(2.) VAIDYANATHA Gurukkal, the plaintiff in the suit claimed that he is the archaka-cum-trustee for the temple, known as Sri Visweswara Vinayagar Temple and that the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment authorities had started to interfere with his Trusteeship by Issuance or a notice in R.C.No.4827/72/A3, dated 30.8.1972 by calling for appointment or non-hereditary trustees for the said temple. The plaintiff questioned the notice by filing an application under Sec.63(b) of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act (hereinafter called as the Act) before the Deputy Commissioner, Coimbatore and prayed for a declaration of his hereditary trusteeship. His claim was negatived. Not satisfied with the order, he preferred an appeal, A.P.No.40 of 1976, before the Commissioner, H.R. & C.E, Madras which came to be dismissed on 19.7.1976. As against the said order, the plaintiff filed the statutory suit in O.S.No.562 of 1976 before the Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore.

(3.) AS against the decree and judgment of the trial Court, the plaintiff preferred an appeal in A.S.No.429 of 1984 before this Court. Learned single Judge of this Court accepted the case of the plaintiff and set aside the decree and judgment of the trial Court by allowing the appeal. Aggrieved by the same, H.R. 8 C.E., Department preferred this appeal.