2025 (3) TMI 1475 - HC - Indian Laws

Petition seeking to grant permission for management and possession of the keys of Arulmighu Kamba Kamatchi Amman and Shri Kathavarayan Temple for continuation of khrp festival as well as for function to be performed during Full Moon and New Moon days - right of the management of the temple is still pending before the civil Court - HELD THAT - As the matter is pending before the civil Court the judgment and decree to be passed in the suit will decide as to who will be entitled to the keys. As of now after the temple is closed post the festival celebrations the keys shall be handed over to the Village Administrative Officer of Alangulam Village. Whenever a ceremony is sought to be performed in the temple advance notice has to be given to the Poosari Peyandi. The Village Administrative Officer will give the keys to the fourth respondent Peyandi for performance of the function. Incase Peyandi refuses to perform his duties then his relatives Periyasamy or Murugan may approach the Village Administrative Officer for the purpose of obtaining the keys. Prior to handing over the keys to Periyasamy or Murugan the Village Administrative Officer shall enquire with Peyandi as to whether he is willing to perform the religious rites and functions. The Village Administrative Officer shall hand over the keys to anyone of the aforesaid two persons only if Peyandi refuses to perform his duties. Thus this Writ Petition is disposed of. Needless to add the rights of the parties will be determined by the judgment and decree in the civil Court. No costs.

Summary

1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

- Whether the petitioner is entitled to the management and possession of the keys of the "Arulmighu Kamba Kamatchi Amman and Shri Kathavarayan Temple" for conducting the Annual 'khrp' festival and regular worship in accordance with the earlier order dated 06.04.2018.

- Whether the writ petition can be entertained to grant mandamus directing the first respondent (Tahsildar) to hand over the keys to the petitioner despite ongoing civil litigation regarding the temple's management.

- Whether the fourth respondent, who is the Poosari (priest) of the temple, can be restrained from preventing the petitioner or others from offering worship and performing religious rites.

- The appropriate interim arrangement for possession and management of the temple keys pending final adjudication by the civil court.

2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

Issue 1: Entitlement of the petitioner to management and possession of temple keys for festival and worship

The petitioner claims entitlement to manage the temple and possess its keys based on historical community rights and prior injunction orders. The temple has been subject to protracted litigation exceeding fifty years, involving multiple communities (Panar, Servai, Thondaiman, Semman). The petitioner relies on a decree obtained in A.S.No.23 of 2016 (arising from O.S.No.229 of 2012) granting injunction in their favor for management rights.

However, the Court notes that the decree in A.S.No.23 of 2016 was set aside by this Court in S.A(MD).No.209 of 2022, and the matter remitted for fresh trial along with connected suits. Hence, the decree relied upon by the petitioner no longer holds legal effect. The civil suit remains pending, and the question of management entitlement is sub judice.

The Court emphasizes that granting the relief sought in the writ petition would amount to pre-judging the civil suit, which is impermissible. The management rights must be adjudicated by the competent civil court through trial and final decree.

Issue 2: Appropriateness of issuing mandamus directing handing over of keys amidst pending civil litigation

The Court observes that the writ petition seeks a mandamus directing the first respondent (Tahsildar) to hand over the temple keys to the petitioner for conducting the festival and worship. However, since the management dispute is pending before the civil court, the writ jurisdiction cannot be exercised to effectively decide the suit or interfere with ongoing proceedings.

The Court reiterates the principle that writ jurisdiction cannot be used as a substitute for civil trial or to pre-empt the trial court's jurisdiction. The rights and possession issues must be decided by the civil court in the pending suit.

Issue 3: Whether the fourth respondent (Poosari) can be restrained from preventing worship

The petitioner fears obstruction by the fourth respondent, Peyandi, the temple Poosari, in offering worship. On this point, the counsel for the third and fourth respondents gave a categorical undertaking on record that Peyandi will strictly abide by the order dated 06.04.2018 passed by the Principal District Judge in I.A.No.45 of 2017 in O.S.No.12 of 2017, and will not prevent any person from offering prayers or performing religious rites.

The Court accepts this undertaking as binding on respondents 3 and 4. It warns that any violation will attract contempt proceedings and other legal remedies. This undertaking safeguards the petitioner's right to worship pending final adjudication.

Issue 4: Interim arrangement for possession and management of temple keys pending final decision

The Court has already passed interim orders in a connected writ petition allowing continuation of the 'khrp' festival and religious functions on Full Moon and New Moon days. It reiterates that the temple shall remain open on such days without discrimination based on caste, creed, or religion.

For practical management, the Court directs that after festival celebrations, the keys shall be handed over to the Village Administrative Officer (VAO) of Alangulam Village. When a ceremony is to be performed, advance notice must be given to the Poosari, Peyandi, who will receive the keys from the VAO for the function.

If Peyandi refuses to perform his duties, his relatives Periyasamy or Murugan may approach the VAO to obtain the keys. However, before handing over keys to them, the VAO must inquire with Peyandi about his willingness to perform the rites. The keys will be handed over to Periyasamy or Murugan only if Peyandi refuses to perform his duties.

This arrangement ensures continuity of worship and festival celebrations without prejudice to the rights of any party, pending the civil court's final determination.

3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

- "The right of the management of the temple is still pending before the civil Court. If I were to grant the relief that is sought for in the writ petition, it will be as if I am pre-judging the suit and decreeing it in favour of the writ petitioner."

- "The fourth respondent, who is the Poosari of the temple, will strictly abide by the orders passed by the learned Principal District Judge... and will not prevent any person from offering their prayers or performing any religious rites and activities to the temple."

- "If the said undertaking is violated, any person aggrieved by the activities of the respondents 3 and 4, will be entitled not only to initiate contempt, but also other proceedings as are open to them."

- "After the temple is closed post the festival celebrations, the keys shall be handed over to the Village Administrative Officer of Alangulam Village... The Village Administrative Officer shall hand over the keys to anyone of the aforesaid two persons only if Peyandi refuses to perform his duties."

- "On any day, the temple is kept open, no person irrespective of the caste, creed, religion will be prevented from offering prayers or religious rites in the temple."

The Court firmly establishes the principle that writ jurisdiction cannot be exercised to pre-empt or decide pending civil disputes concerning management rights. It underscores the binding nature of undertakings given by temple functionaries to ensure freedom of worship. The interim arrangement for key possession balances competing interests and maintains religious functions without prejudice to the parties' substantive rights.