Madras High Court
P.Jayanthi vs The Commissioner on 26 November, 2021
W.A.No.2806 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 26.11.2021
CORAM
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice PARESH UPADHYAY
and
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
W.A.No.2806 of 2021
and C.M.P. No.18479 of 2021
1.P.Jayanthi
2.P.Malini
3.Dr.Sasikala Rao
4.Dr.Latha Bhatt .. Appellants
Vs
1.The Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowment (HR & CE) Dept.,
No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Road,
Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.
2.The Joint Commissioner Chennai
Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowment (HR & CE) Dept.,
No.128, Yadaval Street,
Padi, Chennai – 50.
3.The Assistant Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowment (HR & CE) Dept.,
No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Road,
Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2806 of 2021
4.The Executive Officer,
Arulmigu Gangadeeswarar &
Connected Temples,
Gangadeeswarar Temple,
Purasawalkam, Chennai – 600 084. .. Respondents
Appeal preferred under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the
order dated 29.09.2021 in W.P.No.19258 of 2021.
For Appellants : Mr.R.Srinivas
for M/s.V.Mythili
For Respondents : Mr.NRR.Arun Natarajan,
Spl. Govt. Pleader
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by PARESH UPADHYAY, J.)
Challenge in this appeal is made to the order dated 29
September, 2021 in W.P.No.19258 of 2021. This appeal is by the
original writ petitioners.
2. By the impugned order, while dismissing the writ petition
challenging the issuance of notice dated 09 March, 2017 pertaining to
fair rent, learned Single Judge has held in para 57 as under:-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2806 of 2021
“57.Considering the findings and over all
consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case
on hand, the petitioners are in illegal occupation and have
not paid the fair rent and further by running a profitable
business, causing damages and financial loss to the minor
idol and to the temple and therefore, the petitioners have
no right to continue in the subject property of the temple
and they are liable to be evicted without any further
delay.”
3. Learned advocate for the appellants has addressed the Court
at length. Serious grievance is made that the notice for fair rent was
in breach of principles of natural justice and therefore it ought to
have been interfered with. It is noted that learned advocate for the
appellants has taken this Court extensively through various
provisions of law including Sections 34 and 78(5) of The Tamil Nadu
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1965 and Transfer of
Property Act, coupled with the decision of the Division Bench of this
Court in Arulmigu Angala Parameswari and Kasivishwanathaswami
Temple Adimanaiveal House Owners Association Vs. The State of
Tamil Nadu represented by its Secretary to Government, Hindu
Religious and Charitable Endowments Department and Others (2009
(6) CTC 512) to contend that the order of learned Single Judge calls
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2806 of 2021
for interference. On facts, learned advocate for the appellants has
submitted that the respondent authorities are confused as to whether
the appellants are encroachers or tenants. It is submitted that on one
hand, the fair rent is being asked for and at the same time, the
amount is asked treating the appellants as encroachers. It is
submitted that going by any parameter, the stand taken by the
respondent authorities is illegal, in substance and in procedure. It is
submitted that the rejection of the writ petition by learned Single
Judge is erroneous on more than one count.
4. Learned advocate for the contesting respondent, who
appears on caveat has supported the impugned order of learned
Single Judge. Attention of the Court is also invited to the counter filed
in the writ petition. It is submitted that this appeal be dismissed.
5. Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties
and having considered the material on record, this Court finds as
under:-
5.1. Challenge in the writ petition is to the notice of fair rent
dated 09 March, 2017.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2806 of 2021
5.2. During the course of hearing, learned advocate for the
appellants has also referred to other document dated 20 March 2017,
which may have consequence of eviction of the appellants from the
property in question. Viewing from this angle, reasons recorded by
learned Single Judge are examined by us.
5.3. Learned Single Judge passed the order after taking note of
the counter filed by the respondents, in which it was inter alia
indicated that even the father of the present appellants had not paid
rent, even on the basis of earlier fair rent assessment which was
conducted before more than a decade. To this however, learned
advocate for the appellants has submitted that receipts were
produced before learned Single Judge. Be that as it may, the fact
remains that on the land in question, which is of the Temple, Hotel is
working. According to the respondents, lease was not in force, even
when the father of the appellants was alive and the present
appellants identify/ introduce them, either as tenant(s) or as
encroacher(s) to suit their convenience. Learned single Judge has
examined the matter from all these angles and has arrived at the
conclusion that no protection needs to be granted to the writ
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2806 of 2021
petitioners. We find that taking recourse to Sections 34 and / or
78(5) of the Act, would not change the complexion of the matter qua
the findings recorded by learned Single Judge. Further, the decision
of the Division Bench of this Court, in the case of Arulmigu Angala
Parameswari (supra) as relied by the learned advocate for the
appellants, in our view, would not take the case of the appellants any
further, in the facts of this case. In totality, we do not find any error
much less any error apparent on the face of record, in the impugned
order of learned Single Judge, which may call for any interference in
an intra-court appeal. This appeal therefore, needs to be dismissed.
6. For the reasons recorded above, this writ appeal is
dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected C.M.P.No. 18479 of
2021 is closed.
(P.U., J) (S.S.K., J)
26.11.2021
Index:Yes/No
ssm/9
To
1.The Commissioner,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2806 of 2021
Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowment (HR & CE) Dept.,
No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Road,
Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.
2.The Joint Commissioner Chennai
Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowment (HR & CE) Dept.,
No.128, Yadaval Street,
Padi, Chennai – 50.
3.The Assistant Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowment (HR & CE) Dept.,
No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Road,
Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.
4.The Executive Officer,
Arulmigu Gangadeeswarar &
Connected Temples,
Gangadeeswarar Temple,
Purasawalkam, Chennai – 600 084.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2806 of 2021
PARESH UPADHYAY, J.
and
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J.
ssm
W.A.No.2806 of 2021
26.11.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
