Temple case HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN W.P.(MD)No.31181 of 2025 Senthil Kumar … Petitioner /Vs./

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06.11.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
W.P.(MD)No.31181 of 2025
Senthil Kumar … Petitioner
/Vs./
1. The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep By Its Principal Secretary Department of Tourism, Culture and Endowments, Chennai – 9.
2. The Commissioner,
Mines and Minerals Department, Chennai.
3. The Executive Officer / Joint Commissioner,
Arulmigu Dhandayutapani Swami Temple,
Palani, Dindigul District. … Respondents
PRAYER:- Writ Petition – filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of 3rd respondent proceedings in Na.Ka.No.0173/2022/C3 dated
19.04.2023 in respect of works 1-7, 10 and 14, and quash the same as illegal unconstitutional and ultra vires and consequently direct the respondents to ensure that any construction, expenditure or development work in and around Palani Hill Temple strictly complies with the HR and CE Act statutory provisions and environmental and geotechnical norms by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Vallappan Senior Counsel for I.Malai Raja
For Respondents : Mr.Veerakathiravan
Additional Advocate General
Mr.J.Ashok (R1 & R2)
Additional Government Pleader
Mr.A.K.Sriram Senior Counsel for Mr.R.Murali (R3)
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.)
Mr.J.Ashok, learned Additional Government Pleader accepts
notice for R1 & R2 and is represented by Mr.Veerakathiravan, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr.R.Murali, learned counsel accepts notice for R3 and is represented by Mr.A.K.Sriram, learned Senior Counsel.
2. The petitioner has challenged proceedings in Na.Ka.No.0173/2022/C3 dated 19.04.2023, which provides for developmental works under 14 different heads for a total amount of 2,54,87,30,900/-.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents would
submit that though the original proposal was tentative, it has been finalised in the region of 100 crores as on date and that some of the works have been dropped in entirety and some of them have been
completed either in full or part.
4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the developmental
works proposed do not fall within the permitted ambit of construction of development works to be undertaken by the HR&CE department and would infact lead to destruction of the hill rather than enhancement of protection of the same. For this purpose, they refer to a geologist’s report highlighting that the Palani Hills are dominated by granulite soft rocks.
5. Since much water has flown under the bridge in the course
of last two years, it would be preferable for the Court to have a proper idea of the developmental work as on date. Counters including report on up to date status of the work within three weeks, with a copy served in advance on the petitioner.
6. List on 03.12.2025.
[A.S.M.J.,] & [C.K.J.,]
06.11.2025
Index :Yes/No Internet :Yes sm 
To
1. The Principal Secretary Department of Tourism, Culture and Endowments, Chennai – 9.
2. The Commissioner, Mines and Minerals Department, Chennai.
3. The Executive Officer / Joint Commissioner,
Arulmigu Dhandayutapani Swami Temple, Palani, Dindigul District. 
DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.
AND C.KUMARAPPAN, J. sm
Order made in
W.P.(MD)No.31181 of 2025
Dated:
06.11.2025