K. Thirumalai Jayabala Muthu vs The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment and Others

M. Jaichandren, J.—The main contention of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner is that the impugned order had been passed by the first Respondent, without giving an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, as well as to the Respondents 3 to 7, on 01.03.2010.

The learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the Respondents had not refuted the said submission made by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner.

In such circumstances, this Court find it appropriate to set aside the impugned order of the first Respondent, dated 01.03.2010. However, it would be open to the first Respondent to pass appropriate orders, in accordance with the relevant provisions of law, after giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, as well as to the Respondents 3 to 7, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, based on the letter dated 01.02.2010, referred to in the impugned order of the first Respondent, dated 01.03.2010. This writ petition is ordered accordingly,. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.