Madras High Court
P.Manikandan vs The Commissioner on 28 April, 2023
W.P.(MD) No.10814 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 28.04.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA
W.P.(MD) No.10814 of 2023
and
W.M.P(MD) No.9493 of 2023
P.Manikandan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
No.19, Uthamar Gandhi Salai,
Thousand Lights West,
Nungambakkam,
Chennai-600 034.
2.The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Madurai.
3.The Assistant Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Virudhunagar Division,
Virudhunagar District.
4.The Executive Officer,
A/M.Thathankulam Vinayagar Temple,
Aruppukkottai,
Virudhunagar District. ... Respondents
_________
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.10814 of 2023
Prayer :- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
entire records pertaining to the impugned notice issued by the fourth
respondent under Section 78(1) & 78(2) dated 17.03.2023, and to quash
the same as illegal and consequently, directing the respondents not to
interfere with the peaceful possession and business of the petitioner in
Shop No.168, in T.S.No.271, Block 9, Ward D, old S.No.123, New S.No.
167/1149, Aruppukkottai Town, Virudhunagar District.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Madhavan
For Respondents : Mr.P.Subbaraj
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
The petitioner seeks the issuance of a writ of certiorarified
mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the notice issued by the
fourth respondent under Sections 78(1) and 78(2) HR&CE Act, dated
17.03.2023 and quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents
not to interfere with the peaceful possession and the business of the
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.10814 of 2023
petitioner in Shop No.168, in T.S.No.271, Block 9, Ward D, old S.No.
123, New S.No.167/1149, Aruppukkottai Town, Virudhunagar District.
2. The petitioner had purchased the property in question from the
legal heirs of Late Varadha Shanmugam Pillai. The revenue records had
been mutated in his name and he has been in exclusive possession and
enjoyment of the same. While so, the fourth respondent had filed a civil
suit in O.S.No.123 of 1995 on the file of the Principal District Court,
Srivilliputhur, for the relief of declaration and recovery of possession
stating that the property is belonging to the temple. The suit was later
transferred to the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Virudhunagar
and renumbered as O.S.No.72 of 1996 and once again on the formation
of the Sub Court, Aruppukkottai, the suit was transferred to the learned
Subordinate Judge, Aruppukottai and renumbered as O.S.No.9 of 2001.
The petitioner herein was impleaded as 36th defendant and he had
contested the suit along with other defendants. The petitioner had also
adduced evidence as D.W.6 and had filed Ex.B24 to Ex.B28 to prove his
title to the property. After a full-fledged trial, the suit in O.S.No.9 of
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.10814 of 2023
2001 was dismissed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Arupukottai, vide
his judgment and decree, dated 23.12.2009 and the relief of declaration,
declaring that the fourth respondent temple has title to the property, had
been denied. Thereafter, the fourth respondent temple had filed A.S.No.4
of 2015 on the file of the learned Additional District Judge,
Virudhunagar, where the same now awaits pronouncement of judgment.
While so, after their prayer for declaration of title had been negatived and
an appeal thereunder filed and pending judgment, the fourth respondent
has initiated proceedings under Sections 78 of HR&CE Act terming the
petitioner as an encroacher. Therefore, left with no other alternative, the
petitioner has approached this Court.
3. The conduct of the fourth respondent in issuing this proceedings
is a flagrant attempt to overreach the judgment of a Civil Court. As an
date, the petitioner's title to the property has been denied by the civil
Court and challenge to this decree is now pending in appeal. In this
background, the proceedings now initiated is illegal and has to
necessarily be set aside. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed and
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.10814 of 2023
the proceeding initiated under the impugned order, dated 17.03.2023, is
quashed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
28.04.2023
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
cp
To
1.The Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Chennai.
2.The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Thoothukudi.
3.The Assistant Commissioner/Executive Officer,
Arulmigu Thirukkutralanathatswamy Temple,
Courtallam,
Tenkasi District.
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.10814 of 2023
P.T.ASHA, J.
cp
W.P.(MD) No.10814 of 2023
Dated: 28.04.2023
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
