Court rules violation of natural justice in passing order without hearing; directs fresh inquiry into alleged unauthorized sale of over 200 buffaloes and holds Executive Officer accountable
In a significant judgment dated September 30, 2026, the Madras High Court quashed an order passed by the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment (HR & CE) authorities that had frozen the bank account of V. Durairaj, a temple official, without issuing him any show-cause notice or affording him a personal hearing. The Court held that the impugned order, which has serious civil consequences, was passed in clear violation of the principles of natural justice and was therefore unsustainable in law.
The petitioner, V. Durairaj, approached the Court challenging the order dated August 24, 2026, issued by the third respondent, the Joint Commissioner of HR & CE, which led to the freezing of his bank account. The petitioner contended that the order was passed without notice or an opportunity to be heard, thus violating his fundamental rights under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The Court observed that although the Government Advocate for HR & CE claimed that notice had been issued to the petitioner, there was no reference to such notice in the impugned order. This omission confirmed that the petitioner was denied a fair hearing, a cornerstone of administrative and constitutional law. Consequently, the Court set aside both the order freezing the petitioner's bank account and the principal order itself.
Importantly, the Court laid down clear guidelines for the respondents if they wished to proceed further against the petitioner. They must issue a proper show-cause notice, provide a reasonable opportunity for a personal hearing, conduct a detailed enquiry, and pass orders strictly on merit and in accordance with the law.
The case also brought to light a grave supervisory lapse regarding the unauthorized sale of over 200 buffaloes belonging to the temple, valued at approximately Rs. 83 lakh. The Court strongly suspected negligence on the part of the Executive Officer appointed to manage the temple's affairs. The Executive Officer's primary responsibility was to safeguard temple property, including livestock, and to ensure that any sale was conducted through legitimate public auctions.
The Court directed the HR & CE authorities to conduct a thorough and detailed inquiry into the unauthorized sale. It further ordered appropriate action against those involved in the clandestine sale as well as against the Executive Officer for dereliction of duty and failure to discharge statutory obligations.
This judgment underscores the importance of adhering to natural justice before taking adverse actions against individuals and highlights the accountability of temple management officials in protecting public religious assets.
Bottom Line:
Order affecting rights of petitioner and consequential freezing of bank account, passed without notice or personal hearing, violates principles of natural justice and is liable to be set aside; authority may proceed afresh only after issuing proper show-cause notice, granting personal hearing and conducting detailed enquiry.
Statutory provision(s):
Constitution of India, 1950 Article 226; Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act (implied)
