EXECUTIVE OFFICER Vs. A SANKARAN ALIAS VEMBU GURUKKAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant / Executive Officer, Arulmighu Kopudai Nayagi Amman Temple comes before us by way of this appeal challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.8912 of 1994 which stood allowed.

(2.) In that writ petition, the respondent herein had challenged G.O.Ms.No.2759, Revenue dated 26.11.1964 by which the respondent / original petitioner was directed to be retired on account of his having attained the age of superannuation in terms of Rule 5 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Institutions (Officers and Servants) Service Rules (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules"). His contention was that he being a hereditary archaga, which right was already admitted by the temple and in pursuance of which he continued to serve as a hereditary archaga, was saved by Rule 33 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Rules. He pointed out that the Rules would not affect adversely any hereditary or non-hereditary office-holder or servant, who has been holding any post immediately before the date of the commencement of these Rules.

(3.) The learned Judge accepted the plea and held that since the petitioner / respondent herein was already serving as a hereditary archaga, there would be no question of his rights being affected by the Rules and as such, he could not be retired taking recourse to the Rules and more particularly, Rule 5. Rule 5 provided that a person appointed to a non-hereditary office would retire on attaining the age of 60 years. The case of the petitioner was that this Rule did not in any way come in his way or affect him because, he was a hereditary archaga and as such, had a right to be a archaga during his lifetime. This was accepted by the learned Judge and it is this judgment which is challenged before us.