VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

G.Sankar v. The Commissioner

DISPOSED OF
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
24 February 2026
Bench
D.Bharatha Chakravarthyauthor
Case no.
WP 7516/2026

Follow Madras High CourtFollow D.Bharatha Chakravarthy

Judgment

O R D E R The writ petition is filed challenging the order passed in R.P.No.407 of 2025, dated 19.01.2026 in M.P.No.219 of 2025, dated 19.08.2025.

¶2Upon hearing the Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and upon perusing the material records of the case, the grievance of the petitioner is that they are conducting religious organization that conducts bhajans and other rituals in the name and style 'Thirupanazhwar Bajanai Madam' and they were using the temple's property, admeasuring 4900 sq.ft., along with the existing structure thereon. When the structure became old and dilapidated, they gave a request to the authorities to put up a new structure on their cost so that they can use the property for the said purposes. Accordingly, permission was granted to them on 17.04.2017 for putting up a new building at the costs of Rs.34,20,000/-. Pursuant thereto, they had put up and has been using the building. However, alleging that, as per the permission, they did not formally handover the building to the Temple, the petitioner was treated as an Page Nos.2/7 encroacher and the order was passed in M.P.No.219 of 2025 evicting the petitioner from the building.

¶3Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed a revision, the said order was confirmed and therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶4The Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioners are not commercially exploiting or generating any revenue from and out of the building. They have generously donated the building in favour of the Temple and willing to handover the building formally and provided if they are permitted to use the building for their purposes. She would submit that the days on which the Utsavam and other festivals are given in paragraph No.3 in the tabular column.

¶5Per contra, Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan, Learned Special Government Pleader, taking notice on behalf of the respondents, would point out to the Condition No.10 of the order granting permission dated 17.04.2017. The petitioner ought to have handed over the building to the Temple formally. However, without doing so, since they continued the occupation, the orders have been passed. He would further submit that even now, if the building is formally handed over, thereafter for the purposes of the petitioner, if they give a Page Nos.3/7 request in advance, the Executive Officer will consider and grant permission to use the premises for their purposes of conducting the Bajanai and other Utsavams.

¶6I have considered the rival submissions made on either side and perused the material records of the case.

¶7Now, the Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the building will be formally handed over to the temple, the same can be handed over on condition that the petitioner and the 'Sabha' will be permitted to do their Bajanai, Utsavam and other rituals on the requisite days. Accordingly, let the building be formally handed over, along with the web copy of this order to the Executive Officer of the Temple on 04.03.2026. Thereafter, the building shall be in the possession of the Executive Officer of the Temple. The petitioner pleads they need the building on the following days, when they are conducting the festival and it is essential to extract the tabular column, which is contained in paragraph No.3 of the writ petition, which reads as under: Page Nos.4/7

¶8On the aforesaid days, whenever the petitioner has to use the building, they can request the Executive Officer in writing two days prior to their need and on the days, let the Executive Officer open the building and permit the occupation and use and after the Bajanai, Utsavam and other rituals are the festival is over, the petitioners will vacate and hand over the keys and the property will be again kept under lock and key of the Executive Officer. On the days in which the petitioner/Bajanai madam does not need the building. The building can also be put to other pious purposes/uses by the Executive Officer/Temple. Even time permission is given by the Executive Officer without any further delay or failure, the key should be handed over back to the Executive Officer of the Temple, after completion of the number of days for Page Nos.5/7 which the keys are given.

¶9With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 24-02-2026 bsm To,

¶1The Commissioner, The Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034.

2.The Joint Commissioner, The Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034.

3.The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Ranganatha Perumal Thirukovil, Thiruneermalai, Chennai-600 044. Page Nos.6/7 W.P.No.7516eofe2026 D.BHARATHAoCHAKRAVARTHY,oJ. bsm WPoNo.o7516oofo2026 &oWMPoNos.8098o&o8099oofo2026 24-02-2026 PageeNos.7/7

Case details

Parties and counsel

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24-02-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY & W.M.P.Nos.8098 & 8099 of 2026 G.Sankar, S/o. A. Ganesan, No.20, Suriamman Koil Street, VOC Nagar, Pammal, Chennai-600 075. … Petitioner Vs 1. The Commissioner, The Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034. 2.The Joint Commissioner, The Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034. 3.The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Ranganatha Perumal Thirukovil, Thiruneermalai, Chennai-600 044. … Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the order dated 19.1.2026 in R.P.No.407 of 2025 D2 of the 1st respondent confirming the order dated 19.8.2025 in M.P.No.219 of 2025 of the 2nd respondent and quash the same. Page Nos.1/7 For Petitioner: M/s.AR.L.Gandhimathi, Senior Counsel Assisted by Mr.L.Palani Muthu For Respondents: Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan Special Government Pleader, for R1 to R3

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.