LAWS(MAD)-2006-6-322

SUBRAMANIAM Vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS &

Decided On June 12, 2006
SUBRAMANIAM Appellant
V/S
JOINT COMMISSIONER, HINDU RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT BOARD Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is aggrieved against the order of the learned single Judge in and by which the appellant's writ petition challenging the order of the first respondent dated 17.6.2005 and the consequential order dated 12.7.2005 came to be rejected by holding that the appellant has a right of appeal under Section 54(4) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act 1955 (hereinafter called as "the Act").

(2.) MS. R. Krishnapriya, learned counsel for the appellant contended that the impugned order dated I 7.6.2005 which deprived the appellant's right to continue as a trustee of the second respondent temple was not even served on the appellant, that only the consequential order dated 12.7.2005 alone was served and therefore, on this ground alone the orders are liable to be interfered with.

(3.) THE next contention is that the appellant by virtue of the terms of the scheme decree was entitled to be retained as a trustee representing a particular family by way of succession and that the failure to recognise such a right of the appellant would vitiate the order dated 17.6.2005. Such a contention of the appellant is as regards the merits of the orders impugned in the writ petition and in this writ appeal for which a statutory remedy of appeal under Section 54(4) of the Act has been made available to the appellant to be preferred before the Commissioner. THErefore, the appellant can urge all those contentions as regards the defects in the orders impugned in the writ petition while preferring the appeal before the Commissioner. On that score, the appeal remedy available to the appellant cannot be ignored and the writ petition cannot be entertained. Since it is contented that the copy of the order dated 17.6.2005 was not duly served on the appellant and in order to enable the appellant to work out the appeal remedy more effectively by invoking section 54(4) of the Act, we only deem it proper to permit the appellant to prefer the appeal before the Commissioner within one month from this date.