Representational image
| Photo Credit: Getty Images
The Madras High Court has confirmed a Government Order (G.O.) issued for dismissing a Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) department Executive Officer (EO) from service since he had allowed 20.94 acres of temple land, worth several crore rupees, to be transferred to the names of private individuals.
Justice Krishnaswamy Govindarajan dismissed a writ petition filed by filed by the former EO who had also served as a Fit Person of Madhipaleeswaran Amman Temple at Vadavalli in Coimbatore district and failed to prevent the transfer of patta (revenue document related to land ownership) with respect to the valuable land.
The judge did not stop with dismissing the case related to the petitioner S. Ramakrishnan’s service, he also invoked the parens patriae (under which an idol is considered in a similar position to be that of a minor child and the court takes upon itself the responsibility of protecting its interests) jurisdiction of the High Court.
Wanting to know whether the State government had taken any steps to retrieve the temple land since the transfer had taken place way back in 2012, the judge directed the HR&CE Commissioner to file an action taken report by October 28, 2026 and directed the High Court Registry to list the case next on October 30.
Justice Govindarajan pointed out the writ petitioner, holding a law degree, had enrolled as an advocate in 1993 before getting appointed as an EO- Grade II in the year 2000 pursuant to a selection process undertaken by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (TNPSC) in 1999. He got promoted as EO-Grade III in January 2012.
Transfer of 20.94 acres of Madhipaleeswaran Amman Temple land
On November 15, 2012, the petitioner was issued with a charge memo accusing him of having expressed no objection in an inquiry conducted by an Assistant Settlement Officer in June 2012 for transferring the patta with respect to 20.94 acres of Madhipaleeswaran Amman Temple land to the name of four private individuals.
He was also charged of not having submitted any report to the HR&CE Assistant Commissioner regarding the inquiry attended by him and not making an entry regarding it in his tour diary. The further accusation against him was that he did not even take steps to prefer an appeal against the Assistant Settlement Officer’s order.
The inquiry officer found the petitioner guilty of all the charges on April 8, 2014 and recommended his dismissal from service. Accordingly, the HR&CE Commissioner passed the dismissal order and it was confirmed by the State government in 2017 while rejecting the petitioners’ statutory appeal.
Dismissing the present case pending since 2017, the judge concurred with Special Government Pleader (HR&CE) R. Bharanidharan that the TNPSC’s recommendation to impose a lesser punishment was not binding upon the government which could take the final call depending upon the gravity of the charges.
The judge said, the government had issued the March 30, 2017 G.O., confirming the punishment of dismissal from service only after taking TNPSC’s recommendation too into consideration. As such, the procedural requirement regarding the recommendation had been fully complied with the appellate authority, he added.
Published – October 20, 2026 01:04 pm IST
