Madras High Court
M.Sivachandran vs The Revenue Divisional Officer on 28 December, 2023
W.P(MD)No.31322 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 28.12.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI
W.P(MD)No.31322 of 2023
and
W.M.P(MD)No.26869 of 2023
M.Sivachandran ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Revenue Divisional Office,
Kovilpatti,
Thoothukudi District.
2.The Tahsildar,
Kovilpatti,
Thoothukudi District.
3.The Inspector of Police,
Naalattinputhur Police Station,
Naalattinputhur,
Thoothukudi District.
4.The Executive Officer,
A/M.Shenbhagavalli Amman Temple,
Kovilpatti,
Thoothukudi District. ... Respondents
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.31322 of 2023
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent
to remove the entry 'Government Land' in 'A' register and remove the
words 'Kovil Nilam Thadai Seyyapattulluthu' in Patta No.33 both entries
in respect of Survey Nos.63, 64, 65/1, 65/2 and 53/5, Kilavipatti
Village, Kovilpatti Taluk, Thoothukudi District as per the petitioner's
petition dated 30.11.2023 within a time frame fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Ms.J.Anandhavalli
For Respondent Nos.1, 2 & 4 : Mr.P.Subbaraj
Special Government Pleader
For Respondent No.3 : Mr.Albert James
Government Advocate
ORDER
The present Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner
for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to
remove the entry 'Government Land' in 'A' register and remove the
words 'Kovil Nilam Thadai Seyyapattulluthu' in Patta No.33 both entries
in respect of Survey Nos.63, 64, 65/1, 65/2 and 53/5, Kilavipatti
Village, Kovilpatti Taluk, Thoothukudi District as per the petitioner's
petition dated 30.11.2023 within a time frame fixed by this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2.By consent of both parties, this Writ Petition is taken up
for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
3.Heard Ms.J.Anandhavalli, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner, Mr.P.Subbaraj, learned Special Government Pleader, who
takes notice for the respondents 1, 2 and 4 and Mr.Albert James,
learned Government Advocate, who takes notice for the third
respondent and perused the materials available on record.
4.In the land comprised in Survey No.63, Melakkavankarai
Pulavakulam Village, there exists a Vinayaga Temple Thaneer Pandal
Madom which was constructed by the ancestors of Valli Kannammal.
She endowed her properties for performance of charities for providing
drinking water to needy on the Dwadasi Thithi day, by a deed of
Settlement dated 04.12.1909. The subject of the lands under the
settlement deed are an extent of 12 acres and 21 cents in Survey No.
264, 5 acres and 55 cents in Survey No.262-A and 58 cents in S.No.
262-B, an extent of 88 cents in S.No.263 within the boundaries
mentioned therein. At present, the corresponding survey numbers are
63, 65/1 (punjai) 65/2 (nanjai), 53/5 (nanjai). She has also appointed
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Muthiah Reddiar, S/o. Alagappa Reddiyar, and Subba Naicker, S/o.
Narasimman. The settlee Muthiah Reddiar had executed a deed of Will
on 09.05.1940 in favour of Alagappa Reddiar @ Shenbaga Reddiyar,
his grandson. The other settlee under 1909 document namely Subba
Naicker died issueless 28 years before the execution of Will and this
Muthiah Reddiar alone was doing the above said charitable activities.
Since Muthiah Reddiar had more than one children, he has specifically
given this charity service to be done by his eldest son and the same
should be continued by the eldest son in the family. This Will is in
favour of the petitioner's grandfather Alagappa Reddiar Shenbhaga
Reddiar. When there was a dispute among the legal heirs of Muthiah
Reddiar, a suit in O.S.No.194 of 1948 was filed on the file of the
District Munsif Court, Kovilpatti seeking for permanent injunction as
against the family members. The said suit was dismissed against which
an appeal in A.S.No.91 of 1950 was filed on the file of the Sub Court,
Thoothukudi, wherein the appellate Court has categorically held that
the petitioner's grandfather alone is entitled to function as 'Haqdar'
and to do the charities as per 1909 and 1940 documents.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5.In the meantime, the petitioner's grandfather seems to
have approached the Settlement Officer challenging the order of
Tahsildar wherein his grandfather and one Gopalsamy Naicker were
declared to be entitled as "Hagdars' in respect of Pillayarkoil Thaneer
Pandhal Madom. The Revision Petition of his grandfather was allowed
and the Settlement Officer has categorically held that Shenbaga
Reddiar @ Alagiyaswamy Reddiar alone is the Pillayarkoil Thaneer
Pandhal Madom. The said order was also confirmed by the Director of
Settlement, by an order dated 12.12.1963. When there was a
disturbance in the administration of the abovesaid temple and charity
by the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, an
application in O.A.No.10 of 1969 was filed before the Joint
Commissioner, H.R. & C.E. The said application was dismissed on
30.03.1971 and the same was challenged in A.P.No.17 of 1972 before
the Commissioner, H.R. & C.E, which was also dismissed on
15.07.1972. Subsequently, the petitioner's grandfather as Hereditary
Trustee of Pillayarkoil Thaneer Pandhal Madom had filed a suit in
O.S.No.171 of 1973 before the Sub Court, Thoothukudi to set aside
the order passed by the authorities. The said suit was dismissed, by
judgment and decree dated 26.04.1975. The same was challenged
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
before this Court in A.S.No.674 of 1975, which was confirmed on
28.11.1979. In the above stated circumstances, after the death of the
petitioner's grandfather in the year 2002, his father was in
administration and was doing the kattalais mentioned in the deed of
endowment. Subsequently, his father died in the year 2020 and after
his demise, the petitioner is in administration and performing the
kattalais mentioned in the endowment deed. Absolutely, there is no
complaint in respect of the administration.
6.While so, there was a complaint by the fourth respondent
to the third respondent as if the temple belongs to the Department and
the petitioner was preventing him from putting up a compound wall for
the temple. In the mean time, the petitioner gave a petition to the first
respondent to change the same in the name of Pillayarkoil Thaneer
Pandhal Madom and the patta stands in the name of his father as
trustee for the endowment. During enquiry, on 06.12.2023, the third
respondent obtained a statement from the petitioner in which he
undertook that he will not disturb the construction of the compound
wall by the fourth respondent and abide by the result in the petition
filed before the first respondent. Though the fourth respondent is
permitted to put up the compound wall, the key of the temple is with
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
the petitioner and he continues to do all the activities that are required
for the temple. The petitioner also gave an undertaking before the
fourth respondent that he will abide by the decision of the fourth
respondent and it is also recorded that the fourth respondent also will
not cause any trouble till the proceedings before the first respondent.
Though the complaint and his statement is of recent origin, the fourth
respondent taking advantage of his consent for construction of
compound wall, obtained EB service connection for the temple. In the
revenue records, it is revealed that the abovesaid lands are classified
as poromboke. Hence, the petitioner filed a petition before the first
respondent on 30.11.2023. Since the said petition has not been
considered so far, the petitioner has filed this present Writ Petition.
7.It is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned
counsel appearing for the petitioner that the said petition dated
30.11.2023 on the file of the first respondent has been transferred to
the file of the second respondent for appropriate action.
8.In view of the above, without going into merits of the
case, this Court hereby direct the second respondent to dispose of the
petitioner's petition, dated 30.11.2023 and pass appropriate orders on
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight (8) weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
9.Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order
as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
28.12.2023
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes
ps
To
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Revenue Divisional Office,
Kovilpatti,
Thoothukudi District.
2.The Tahsildar,
Kovilpatti,
Thoothukudi District.
3.The Inspector of Police,
Naalattinputhur Police Station,
Naalattinputhur,
Thoothukudi District.
4.The Executive Officer,
A/M.Shenbhagavalli Amman Temple,
Kovilpatti,
Thoothukudi District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
ps
28.12.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
