Madras High Court
K.Palanichamy Nayaker vs The Joint Commissioner on 19 July, 2023
W.P.(MD).No.17349 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 19.07.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY
W.P.(MD).No.17349 of 2023
and
W.M.P(MD).No.14541 of 2023
K.Palanichamy Nayaker ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments
Department,
Tiruchirappalli District.
2.The Assistant Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments
Department,
Tiruchirappalli District.
3.The Executive Officer / Thakkar,
Arulmigu Muthallamman Ayyanar Vagaiyara Thirukovil,
Thoppanaickanpatti, Kumaravadi Village,
Manapparai Taluk,
Tiruchirappalli District.
4.The Regional Inspector,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments
Department, Vaiyampatti,
Manapparai Taluk,
Tiruchirappalli District. ... Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/7
W.P.(MD).No.17349 of 2023
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
records relating to the impugned notice issued by the third respondent dated
19.05.2023 and consequential notice dated 21.06.2023 and quash the same and
further directing the third respondent to fix the fair rent by considering the
petitioner's representation dated 22.06.2023.
For Petitioner : Mr.Mathavaselvam
For R-1, R-2 : Mr.S.Kameswaran,
and R-4 Government Advocate.
For R-3 : Mr.G.Mathavan
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed challenging the impugned notice dated
19.05.2023 and consequential notice dated 21.06.2023 and further directing the
third respondent to fix the fair rent by considering the petitioner's
representation dated 22.06.2023.
2. The petitioner is claiming that the petitioner’s father and one
Nallathoppa Naicker had administered the temple affairs. The said Nallathoppa
Naicker filed an application under section 63(b) of HR&CE to appoint him as
hereditary trustee and the same was allowed vide order dated 31.01.1975.
Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner’s father preferred an appeal under
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.17349 of 2023
section 69(1) of the Act, but was dismissed on delay. Hence, a suit was filed in
O.S.No.115 of 1978 and the same was dismissed for default.
3. The petitioner had preferred a suit in O.S.No.408 of 1995 on the file of
Sub Court Kulithalai seeking declaration of hereditary trustee. One Appanna
Naicker filed another suit in O.S.No.600 of 1995 on the file of Sub Court
Kulithalai seeking recovery of possession of temple properties. Through a
common judgment dated 21.09.1998, the petitioner and the said Appanna
Naicker were declared as joint trustees of the above temples and they are in
possession and enjoyment of the respective portion of the properties, however
dismissed the O.S.600 of 1996 which was filed for recovery of temple
properties. Aggrieved over the same, the Appanna Naicker had preferred
A.S.(MD)No.564 of 1999 and A.S.(MD)No.565 of 1999 before this Court.
This Court vide Common Judgment dated 13.06.2023 allowed the First Appeal
in A.S.No.564 of 1999 (filed against O.S.No.408 of 1995) and dismissed an
appeal in A.S.(MD)No.565 of 1999 (filed against O.S.No.600 of 1995). While
passing the said judgment, this Court directed the authorities to initiate
proceedings insofar as the hereditary trustee, if the disputes still persist among
various persons in respect of management of temples. Further insofar as the
temple land is concerned, it is for the authorities to independently decide
whether to proceed with eviction or to regularize the possession by fixing fair
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.17349 of 2023
rent as per law. In fact, the appellate Court has granted relief to the petitioner,
wherein, it has directed the HR & CE Department to consider the petitioner's
application in accordance to law.
4. For better appreciation, the relevant portion of the order dated
13.06.2023 in A.S.(MD)Nos.564 and 565 of 1999, is extracted hereunder:
“21.As far as the hereditary trusteeship is concerned, the
Deputy Commissioner or Joint Commissioner may initiate
proceedings, if the dispute still persists among the various
persons in respect of management of temples. Since the
order passed under Ex.B1 is set aside. The above said
authorities are directed to give opportunity to all the
parties, who are all interested in the said issue and decide
the issue afresh and pass orders afresh, in accordance with
law. As far as the immovable properties i.e., temple lands
which are in the possession and enjoyment of various
persons, it is stated that appropriate proceedings had
already been initiated under Section 78 of the Act for
eviction of the said persons from the temple properties. It is
for the authorities to proceed with the process of eviction of
the said encroachers or to regularize their possession by
fixing fair rent as per law. The same is left open to the
authorities to decide the same as per law. Accordingly, all
the points are answered”.
Therefore, the petitioner is claiming to consider his representation in the
light of the judgment passed in the aforesaid Appeal Suit.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.17349 of 2023
5. The respondents submitted that the proceedings itself initiated based
on the direction issued by the High Court in the aforementioned Appeal Suit.
Therefore, the respondents would strictly adhere to the provisions of Section 78
of the HR & CE Act. The respondents also will consider the case of the
petitioner as directed by the High Court. However, the petitioner submitted
they used the land for cultivation of paddy. The petitioner is permitted to take
the production of cultivation. However, the petitioner is restrained from further
cultivation until the aforesaid proceedings under Section 78 of the Act are over.
The respondents are directed to consider the petitioner's claim as directed by
this Court in Appeal Suit. The petitioner is directed to participate in the
enquiry proceedings as well. The enquiry proceeding shall be completed within
a period of six (6) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall
be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
19.07.2023
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
Nsr
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.17349 of 2023
To
1.The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments
Department,
Tiruchirappalli District.
2.The Assistant Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments
Department,
Tiruchirappalli District.
3.The Executive Officer / Thakkar,
Arulmigu Muthallamman Ayyanar Vagaiyara Thirukovil,
Thoppanaickanpatti, Kumaravadi Village,
Manapparai Taluk,
Tiruchirappalli District.
4.The Regional Inspector,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments
Department, Vaiyampatti,
Manapparai Taluk,
Tiruchirappalli District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.17349 of 2023
S.SRIMATHY, J.
Nsr
W.P.(MD).No.17349 of 2023
19.07.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
