G.Dhanapal v. The Tahsildar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 19.06.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM W.P.No.17331 of 2003 & W.M.P.No.21689 of 2003 G.Dhanapal ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Tahsildar, Tiruppattur,

2. The Executive Officer, Arulmighu Dharmarajar Temple, Tirupattur, Vellore District.

3. The Commissioner, Tirupattur Municipality,

4. The District Collector, ... Respondents PRAYER : Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 1 and 3 to restore possession of door No.47-B, Dharmarajar Koil Street, Tirupattur Town, Vellore District to the petitioner.

For Petitioner :: Mr.V.Raghavachari For Respondents :: Mr.A.Zakir Hussain Government Advocate for R1, R3 and R4 Mr.Maharaja Special Government Pleader for R2

O R D E R

The Writ Petition is filed for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 3 to restore possession of door No.47-B, Dharmarajar Koil Street, Tirupattur Town, Vellore District to the petitioner.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he was inducted into possession by the Temple Authorities and he was paying rents regularly to the Temple Authorities. He had spent about Rs.30,000/- to put up construction. However, the first respondent claiming that the land is a poramboke land, without issuing any notice, demolished the building, despite objections from the Temple Authorities.

3. Mr.Maharaja, learned Special Government Pleader would submit that there is a dispute with regard to title over the property and it could be decided only by a Comptent Civil Court and the disputed question of fact cannot be gone into in the present writ petition.

4. It is seen from the records that even according to the petitioner, the Government as well as the second respondentExecutive Officer, Arulmighu Dharmarajar Temple, Tirupattur, Vellore District, have claimed title over the proeprty. Since there is a dispute with regard to title, this Court is of the considered opinion, the title can be decided only by a Comptent Civil Court and till the title is decided, the prayer sought for in the Writ Petition cannot be considered by this Court.

5. In view of the above facts, I find no merit in the Writ Petition. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed, giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Competent Civil Court for redressal of his grievance. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CO) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar r n s To

1. The Tahsildar, Tiruppattur,

2. The Executive Officer, Arulmighu Dharmarajar Temple, Tirupattur, Vellore District.

3. The Commissioner, Tirupattur Municipality,

4. The District Collector, +1cc to Mr.V.Raghavachari, Advocate Sr. 42891 +1cc to the Government Advocate Sr. 43100 W.P.No.17331 of 2003 & W.M.P.No.21689 of 2003 NMI(CO) VR(28/06/2017)