D.Vijayalakshmi v. State Rep By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22-01-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY D.Vijayalakshmi(Age 72) W/o N. Devaraj, 172/4, West Ramalingam Road, R.S.Puram, Coimbatore-641 002 Petitioner Vs 1.State represented by The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Department, 119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034 2.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Department, Commercial Tax Office Complex, Dr.Balasundaram Road, Coimbatore-641 018.
3.The Managing Trustees Arulmigu Siva Subramaniaswamy Bajanai Madaalayam, 43, UTG Lane, Edayar Street, Coimbatore-641001 Respondents PRAYER Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to take necessary action on the petitioner's representation dated 03.06.2024 and to file final report within the time fixed by the Hon'ble Court.
For Petitioner Ms.D.Vijayalakshmi-P-in-P For Respondents Mr.K.Karthikeyan, GA for R1 and R2 Mrs.Sudarshana Sunder for R3
ORDER
The writ petition is filed with a prayer to take necessary action on the petitioner's representation dated 03.06.2024 and file a report within the time fixed by this Court.
2.Upon considering the said representation, that is annexed along with the type set of papers, the case of the petitioner is that, the property admeasuring 1.88 cents at No.4, Veerapandi Panchayat, Coimbatore District originally belonged to her relative, who by a registered Will bequeathed the same in favour of Arulmigu Siva Subramaniaswamy Bajanai Madalayam and therefore, the 3rd respondent-temple is the owner of the property. When the property was leased out to one Narayanasamy, being the lessee, he unauthorisedly sold 50 cents of the land to the Agricultural Engineering Department and therefore, the petitioner seeks action to recover the entire property.
3. When the matter came up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 3rd respondent submitted that the entire acre 1.88 cents of land is intact with the temple. The revenue records are only in the name of the
temple. The lessee is only in enjoyment of the property and rents are being recovered by the temple and there is no any encroachment or frittering away of the temple property.
4. The petitioner/party-in-person submitted that by mentioning the property value as Rs.100/- or less, the said Narayanasamy has executed a sale deed in favour of Government department by way of an unregistered document. Obviously, the value of 50 cents cannot be mentioned as less than Rs.100/-. If that is done, the same will only be sham and nominal, to avoid the registration proceedings. Secondly, being the tenant, the tenant is not entitled to convey the property, whether to a government agency or any private agency. Therefore, the said allegation alone shall be looked into by the second respondent, by issuing notice to the petitioner as well as the interested tenants and if it is a fact that any of the rights of the temple is violated or any alienation is done, further action on the tenant as well as to secure the property shall be taken in accordance with law.
5. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. It is needless to mention that the temple is not mentioned in the above proceedings. No costs. 22-01-2026 ari
To 1.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Department, 119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034 2.The Joint Commissioner Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Department, Commercial Tax Office Complex, Dr. Balasundaram Road, Coimbatore-641 018 3.The Managing Trustees Arulmigu Siva Subramaniaswamy Bajanai Madaalayam, 43, UTG Lane, Edayar Street, Coimbatore-641001
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
ari 22-01-2026