Madras High Court
Ganesan vs A.Radhakrishnan on 8 January, 2025
Author: R.Subramanian
Bench: R.Subramanian
W.A.No. 3780 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08.01.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
W.A.No. 3780 of 2024
and
C.M.P.No. 29701 of 2024
Ganesan ...Appellant
Vs.
1.A.Radhakrishnan
2.The Commissioner of Revenue Administration,
Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
3.The District Collector,
First Floor, Collectorate,
Kancheepuram - 631501.
4.The Regional Deputy Director of Survey
and Land Records,
Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
5.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Collectorate, Kancheepuram - 631501.
6.The Tahsildar,
Wallajabad Taluk,
Kancheepuram District.
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No. 3780 of 2024
7.The Present Administrator,
Arulmigu Valampuri Vinayagar Temple,
Wallajabad, Kancheepuram District. ...Respondents
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the
order dated 14.09.2023 made in W.P.No.27091 of 2023.
For Appellant : Mr.Vijayanarayan, Senior Counsel
for Mr.Prasad Vijayakumar
For Respondents : Mr.Vadivelu Deenadayalan
Additional Govt. Pleader for R2 to R6
Mr.P.Valliappan, Senior Counsel
for M/s.P.V.Law Associates for R7
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.)
The Appellant was not a party to the writ petition in W.P.No.27091 of
2023 seeks to challenge the order on the ground, it affects his rights to the
property in Survey No. 257 of Walajabad Village. A Writ Petition petition
was filed by the 1st respondent seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the
5th respondent to convene a joint meeting to safeguard the interest of the
6th respondent temple and its properties, considering the petitioner's
representation dated 19.07.2023.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2. The operative portion of the order of the Writ Court reads as
follows.
"4. Considering the facts and circumstances, the
respondents 2 to 4 are directed to initiate all steps to ascertain
the properties belonging to the 6th respondent / the Temple and
remove the encroachments, if any found and protect the
properties belonging to the Temple.
5. The 2nd respondent / the District Collector,
Kanchipuram is directed to convene a meeting without causing
any undue delay by fixing date and time and communicate the
same to all the concerned officials including the petitioner."
3. We have heard Mr. Vijayanarayan, learned Senior Counsel for
Mr.Prasad Vijayakumar, learned counsel for the appellant.
4. It is the contention of Mr. Vijayanarayan, learned Senior Counsel
for the appellant that the land in Survey No.257 belongs to the appellant and
the same has been in possession of the appellant and his predecessors in
interest for more than 100 years therefore, an enquiry into the title to the
said land cannot be launched at this point of time. We do not think, we can
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
pronounce on the title to the land in Survey No.257 in these proceedings. In
as much as we cannot pronounce upon the title to the said land, we cannot
prevent an enquiry from being held.
5. The 1st respondent approaches this court claiming that certain
lands belong to the Temple and wants the Temple properties to be
safeguarded. The writ Court has been cautious enough to not to pronounce
on the title of the Temple. It has only directed an enquiry to ascertain the
properties belonging to the Temple and to take appropriate action for
removal of encroachments. This court has also directed that an enquiry to be
conducted, after giving notice to all persons interested.
6. It is also seen from the report of the Tahasildar dated 22.08.2023
wherein, the Tahsildar has stated that the land in Survey No. 257 belongs to
third parties and it does not belong to the Temple. Therefore, the
apprehension of the petitioner that his land may also be declared to the land
of the Temple is unfounded.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7. However, since the survey number mentioned in the writ petition as
well as in the representation made by the 1st respondent, we only direct the
authorities to issue notice to the appellant while conducting an enquiry and
give him opportunity to defend his title to Survey No.257. Notices shall
also be issued to other persons interested including the 7th respondent
Temple. The enquiry shall be conducted and appropriate orders shall be
passed within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of
this order.
8. With the above observations, this Writ Appel is disposed of. No
costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(R.S.M., J.) (C.K., J.)
08.01.2025
kkn
Index: No
Speaking order
Neutral Citation : No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To:
1.The Commissioner of Revenue Administration,
Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
2.The District Collector,
First Floor, Collectorate,
Kancheepuram - 631501.
3.The Regional Deputy Director of Survey
and Land Records,
Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
4.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Collectorate, Kancheepuram - 631501.
5.The Tahsildar,
Wallajabad Taluk,
Kancheepuram District.
6.The Present Administrator,
Arulmigu Valampuri Vinayagar Temple,
Wallajabad, Kancheepuram District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
and
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
KKN
and
08.01.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
