P.Karuppasamy vs The Commissioner
- Court
- Madras High Court
WP(MD) No. 31622 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 05-11-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR
RAMAMOORTHY
WP(MD) No. 31622 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011476572026}
WMP (MD) No.24308 of 2026
P.Karuppasamy
Sathangudi Village,
Thirumangalam Taluk,
Madurai District
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Commissioner
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments
Department,
Chennai - 600 034
2. The Joint Commissioner
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments
Department,
B-1 Road,
Ellis Nagar,
Madurai - 625 016
3. The Assistant Commissioner
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments
Department,
B-1 Road,
Ellis Nagar,
Madurai - 625 016
4. The Tahsildar
Thirumangalam Taluk Office,
Madurai District
5. The Inspector of Police
Thirumangalam Taluk Police Station,
__________
Page 1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 04:36:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 31622 of 2026
Thirumangalam,
Madurai District
6. V. Sooriyan
D.No. 35/T.N.H.B Utchapatti II,
Austinpatty Post,
Tirumangalam Taluk,
Madurai District
7. Arulmigu Valagurunathasamy Temple
On Rep. by of committee,
Sathangudi Village,
Thirumangalam Taluk,
Madurai District
8. S. Maruthupandi
(First Kothu Vagaiyara)
S/o.Ammasi Thevar,
MuniyandiKovil Street Backside,
Kappalur,
Thirumangalam Taluk,
Madurai District
9. V. Karuppaiah
(Second Kothu Vagaiyara)
S/o.Velu Thevar,
West Street,
Sathanigudi -625 706,
Tirumangaiam Taluk,
Madurai District
10.P. Rajapandy
(Third Kothu Vagaiyara)
S/o.Pichai Thevar,
East Street,
Sathangudi -625 706,
Tirumangailam Taluk,
Madurai District
11.Gurusamy
(Fourth Kothu Vagaiyara)
S/o.Kandan,
No. 293/2,
__________
Page 2 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 04:36:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 31622 of 2026
Marugupandian,
Sathangudii,
Madurai District
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus,
calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings the 2nd
respondent in O.A.No.2 of 2007 dated 27.10.2016 before the Joint
Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments
Department, Madurai and the Commissioner, H.R.and C.E.
Administration Department, Chennai, in R.C.NO.7598/2015/D2 and
dated 24.12.2019 and to quash the same as illegal and consequently to
direct the 1st respondent to conduct the enquiry and pass such further or
other orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case and thus render justice.
For Petitioner(s) :M/s R.Sundar
For Respondent(s) :Mr.,P.Pethu Rajesh, AGP
for R1 to R4
Mr.R.Mohamed Riyaz, GA (Crl.)
for R5
ORDER
One P. Veluthevar and four others initiated proceedings before the
Joint Commissioner in O.A. No. 2 of 2007. By order dated 27.10.2016,
the proceeding was concluded by directing that Vibhuthi honour be given
to V.Suryan. An appeal was lodged against said order by Poosari Sokkan
and Periyasamy. Said appeal was presented belatedly and was
__________
Page 3 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 04:36:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 31622 of 2026
consequently rejected on 24.12.2019 by recording that Section 5 of the
Limitation Act is not applicable and that the Commissioner is not
empowered to condone the delay in filing appeals.
2. After the lapse of ten years from the date of the order of the Joint
Commissioner, the petitioner has approached this Court for consideration
of a representation to receive the appeal.
3. Mr. Pethu Rajesh, learned Additional Government Pleader,
accepts notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 4 and Mr.R.Mohamed Riyaz,
learned Government Advocate (Crl.), accepts notice on behalf of the fifth
respondent. Mr. Pethu Rajesh points out that the original order was issued
after hearing all parties thereto.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the appellate
order was issued without notice to the parties.
5. The appellate order records that delay cannot be condoned
because Section 5 is inapplicable to proceedings under the Tamil Nadu
HR&CE Act. The conclusion recorded in the said appellate order does
__________
Page 4 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 04:36:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 31622 of 2026
not suffer from any infirmity and it is entirely in consonance with the
judgments of the Supreme Court on this issue. The petitioner has
approached this Court seven years after the appellate order and ten years
after the original order. In these circumstances, no case is made out for
interference or for directing consideration of the petitioner's
representation.
6. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. There
shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous
petition is closed.
05-11-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
PKN
__________
Page 5 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 04:36:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 31622 of 2026
To
1. The Commissioner
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department
Chennai - 600 034
2. The Joint Commissioner
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department
B-1 Road
Ellis Nagar
Madurai - 625 016
3. The Assistant Commissioner
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department
B-1 Road
Ellis Nagar
Madurai - 625 016
4. The Tahsildar
Thirumangalam Taluk Office
Madurai District
5. The Inspector of Police
Thirumangalam Taluk Police Station
Thirumangalam
Madurai District
6. Arulmigu Valagurunathasamy Temple
On Rep. by of committee
Sathangudi Village
Thirumangalam Taluk
Madurai District
__________
Page 6 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 04:36:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 31622 of 2026
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.
PKN
WP(MD) No. 31622 of 2026
05-11-2026
__________
Page 7 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 04:36:07 pm )