V.Ranganathan, v. The District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06-08-2015
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN W.P.No.24037 of 2015 V.Ranganathan Hereditary Trustee/Archagar Arulmigu Kodhanda Ramasamy Thirukovil Sathyamangalam Village and Post Gingee Taluk Villupuram District.
...Petitioner
Vs 1 The District Collector Villupuram District.
2 The District Revenue Officer Villupuram District.
3 The Revenue Divisional Officer Thindivanam.
4 The Revenue Tahsildar Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District.
...Respondents
Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of mandamus directing the District Revenue Officer the 2nd Respondent herein to take the Appeal Petition dated 15.03.2014 on file and to dispose the same in accordance with law within the time frame as may be stipulated by the Honourable Court For petitioner :
Mr. V. Sekar For respondent :
Mr. R.A.S. Senthilvel, AGP
ORDER
By consent, the main writ petition is taken up for final hearing. 2.
The petitioner claims that he and his ancestors have been continuously rendering service and doing 'Nithiya Pooja Kainkaryam' to the deity of Arulmighu Sri Kothandaramasamy Temple in sathyamangalam Village, Gingee Taluk for more than five generation and functioning as hereditary trustees for more than 300 years. The petitioner would further state that during British Rule, the lands were also donated to his ancestors recognising their services. The petitioner would further state that after demise of his grandfather, his father was holding the post as Worshipper and hereditary trustee of the said Temple who he died on 14-03-2009. The petitioner's father had executed a Will dated 06-11-2008 bequeathing the service lands and hereditary trusteeship, in favour of the petitioner.
The father of the petitioner while he was alive had challenged the order cancelling the patta by the fourth respondent. To dispose of the said appeal, the petitioner filed W.P.No.32232 of 2013 and it was disposed of as infructuous. It is also stated by the petitioner that the third respondent herein passed an order dated 20-02-2014 holding that the fourth respondent, the Revenue Tahsildar has no power to cancel the order passed by the Settlement Officer, which has come into effect even in the year 1969. However, the second respondent erroneously held that patta No.928 shall be issued in the name of the petitioner as well as in the name of the Temple.
The petitioner challenged the same by filing an appeal before the second respondent on 15-03-2014 and consequently, submitted a petition on 17-03-2014 and filed additional grounds on 14-05-2014. Since the appeal has not been taken on file, he sent a reminder on 13-08-2014. The grievance taken by the petitioner on the appeal petition is yet to be taken on file and therefore, has come forward with this petition. 3.
Mr. R.A.S. Senthilvel, learned Additional Government Pleader accepts on behalf of the respondents.
4.
This Court, taking into consideration of the limited scope of the prayer sought for by the petitioner and without going into the merits of the case, directs the second respondent to issue notice to the concerned parties within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and dispose of the appeal petition within a period of eight weeks, thereafter and communicate the decision taken to the petitioner.
5.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar glp To 1 The District Collector Villupuram District.
2 The District Revenue Officer Villupuram District.
3 The Revenue Divisional Officer Thindivanam.
4 The Revenue Tahsildar Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District 1 CC to Mr. V. Sekar, Advocate SR.No. 40843 1 CC to the Government Pleader, SR.No. 40941 W.P.No.24037 of 2015 TS (CO) PSI (26.08.2015)