(1.) The challenge here is to an order dated January 20, 2020 passed on a writ petition. The subject-matter of the writ petition was an order dated January 13, 2015 passed by the first respondent herein by which an old and concluded matter was sought to be re-opened some eight years later. The appellant-writ petitioner questions the very propriety of the steps initiated eight years after the matter had been given a quietus. The Writ Court declined to interfere. Hence the appeal.
(2.) By an order dated March 30, 2007, the then Special Commissioner and Commissioner in the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (Administration) Department of the State Government found in favour of the writ petitioner herein or the Thirupanandal Sri Kasi Mutt that the writ petitioner represents. Sufficient reasons were indicated in the order and land was discovered to be in the name of Kasi Mutt that were not part of what the State controlled through its HR&CE Department.
(3.) By an order dated January 13, 2015, the Additional Chief Secretary to the State Government purported to re-open the matter on rather specious grounds as contained in his order which was questioned by the writ petitioner in the proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution. By such order of January 13, 2015, the Additional Chief Secretary directed an inquiry to be conducted by another Additional Chief Secretary and directed the writ petitioner herein and others interested to appear in person or through their authorised representatives before such other Additional Chief Secretary. For good measure, the order of January 13, 2015 recorded that in default of appearance before the other Additional Chief Secretary, the matter would be disposed of ex parte.