The Madras High Court on Tuesday decided to pronounce orders on Wednesday on a writ appeal preferred by Sri Ram Samaj, which manages the Ayodhya Mandapam at West Mambalam in Chennai, against the recent dismissal of its 2014 writ petition challenging a 2013 Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) department order appointing a Thakkar (Fit Person) to manage its affairs.
First Division Bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy indicated that they might quash the 2013 order and allow the HR&CE department to hold a fresh inquiry by an independent authority. They said, Advocate General R. Shunmugasundaram would be authorised to select the inquiry officer and the A-G replied that even a retired judge could be asked to inquire.
The Bench also said that a fair opportunity of hearing must be given to the Samaj before the conclusion of the fresh inquiry and that the latter must be allowed to run its affairs until the completion of such inquiry. Earlier, senior counsel Satish Parasaran, representing the Samaj, said, it was created by a few senior citizens with their hard earned money and they had got it registered as a society in 1958.
Stating that the activities of the Samaj were largely secular in nature, the senior counsel said, it was running a matriculation school, a marriage hall, a centre to perform obsequies called Gnanavapi and managing Ayodhya Mandapam where people congregate to listen to lectures. Since 2004, a “disgruntled” member of the Samaj had been making complaints against its office-bearers to the HR&CE department.
Acting upon his complaint, the HR&CE department in 2013 came to a conclusion that Ayodhya Mandapam was a place of public religious worship by Hindu community since it had reportedly installed idols and performing pujas through public contributions. Mr. Parasaran said, the Supreme Court had categorically held that a place could be termed as ‘temple’ only if the idols had been consecrated as per Agama Sastras.
He also informed the court that the Samaj filed a writ petition in 2014 and obtained an interim stay of the HR&CE order. However, on March 17 this year, a single judge dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the dispute over Ayodhya Mandapam being a place of worship or not could not be decided under the writ jurisdiction and that the Samaj would have to seek the alternative remedy available to it.
Not in agreement with such a decision, the Chief Justice said, a writ petition ought not to have been dismissed after eight years on the ground of availability of alternative remedy. Earlier, the A-G informed the court that the Fit Person had been appointed only to oversee the religious functions of the Samaj and that the official had not interfered with the management of the school or the marriage hall.
