MAHA THEJO MANDALA SABHA Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, Maha Thejo Mandala Sabha, a society registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act (Regn.No.15/88) represented by its Secretary M.Jayaraman, has filed the present writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to hand over to the petitioner the possession and management of the affairs of Sri Pamban Kumaraguru Dasar Swamigal Samadhi with properties movable and immovable and land and buildings in acre 3.02 comprised in Paimash No.967, Survey No.172/2A, Mayurapuram, Thiruvanmiyur Village, Chennai 600 041 and to refrain from interfering with the performance of the religious and spiritual rituals by the petitioner in the 'Samadhi' of Sri Pamban Kumaraguru Dasar Swamigal.

(2.) Mr.R.Thiagarajan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner forcibly pleaded that even after winning three rounds of litigation against the respondent-H.R. & C.E. Department, the petitioner-Sabha is not able to reap the hard earned fruits three times bestowed by this Court to the petitioner. Explaining further, he submitted that in the first round of litigation, when the Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner, H.R. & C.E. Department, the respondents 4 & 3 herein decided to take over the affairs of the petitioner-Sabha from one Mr.T.T.Kuppusami Chettiar, who was in-charge of the sabha in 1971, Writ Petition No.3501 of 1971 was filed to issue a Writ of Prohibition prohibiting the respondents from acting in terms of their notice No.1003 of 1969 dated 5.11.71 seeking to interfere with the petitioner's possession of Sri Pamban Kumaragurudasa Swamigal Samadhi Koil, Thiruvanmiyur and its property. This Court, appreciating the factor that Srimath Pamban Kumara Gurudasa Swamigal (hereinafter referred to as "the Swamigal") was an inspired baktha of Lord Muruga and had contributed to the celebrated 'Shanmugha Kavasam', 'Panchamirtha Vannam', 'Kumarasthavam' and had also composed more than 6,666 compositions; that the Swamigal was a legend, Saint and a Gnani during his lifetime with a lot of followers and devotees including the most popular and familiar scholars like Thiru.Vi.Ka, Dr.Guruswamy Mudaliar and others; that before attaining Jeevan Mukthi, Swamigal left his last 'Will and Testament' in the year 1926 and 'Codicil' in the year 1927, which were also probated on the Original Side of this Court in O.P.No.87 of 1933 and that in terms of the said Will, Swamigal had appointed a sabha called 'Mahathejo Mandalam' with 21 members constituting mostly his disciples, bakthas and worshippers of Lord Subramania to perform the 'Mayura Vahana Sevanam' festival and other pooja rituals, in its order dated 4.9.73 passed in W.P.No.3501 of 1971, had held that the characteristics of a temple had to be decided in a regularly instituted action either at the instance of the petitioner therein or by the department to find out whether the subject institution comes within the jurisdiction and supervision of the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 and finally, it has been also held that if substantially the Hindu public go to a 'Samadhi' for Guru Pooja, then the same is not a temple, as it has neither been consecrated in accordance with the Hindu customs and notions nor are there present the essential characteristics of a temple such as Dwajasthambam, Arthamandapam, Mahamandapam and Garbagraham. It was further held that without adverting to these essential facts, the respondents cannot assume jurisdiction under the provisions of the Act. On this basis, it has been held that the petitioner was entitled to a writ of prohibition. Accordingly, the said writ petition was allowed against the respondent-H.R. & C.E. Department.

(3.) Again, in view of the non-performance of the rituals in accordance with the wishes of the Swamigal shown in the Will, the second round of litigation was initiated in Writ Petition No.6157 of 1991 praying for a writ of mandamus to the Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department to entrust the performance of all the religious and spiritual rituals of the 'Samadhi' to the petitioner-Sabha. This Court, by order dated 20.6.1991, with a categorical finding that the H.R. & C.E. Department has assumed jurisdiction and spoiled the quietness of the place in which the 'Samadhi' is installed with a further finding that what were all done for the past six years by the department amounted to a highhanded action, issued a mandamus directing the respondents 1 & 2 therein to handover the administration of the institution to the petitioner-Sabha.