R.Ramesh, v. The Assistant Commissioner/

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 30.04.2019

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.THARANI W.A.(MD).Nos.113 to 116 of 2019 and C.M.P.(MD).Nos.828, 829, 830 and 831 of 2019 R.Ramesh ... Appellant in W.A.No.113/2019 Navin Gidiya ... Appellant in W.A.No.114/2019 A.Anand ... Appellant in W.A.No.115/2019 Kamal Ramesh ... Appellant in W.A.No.116/2019 Vs.

The Assistant Commissioner / Executive Officer, Arulmigu Thayumanaswamy Temple, Rock Fort, Trichy.

... Respondent in all W.As.

Prayer:- Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order of this Court in W.P.(MD).Nos.4371, 4488, 4505 and 4933 of 2018, dated 04.06.2018.

Common Prayer in WP(MD). 4371, 4488, 4504 and 4933/ 2018 : Writ Petition are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue Writ of Certiorari there by call for the records of the respondent in Na.Ka.No.1627/18/A5 dated 19.02.2018, relating to shop No.51,52 and 53 quash the same as illegal.

For Appellants : Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian For Respondent : Mr.M.Saravanan C O M M O N J U D G M E N T (Judgment of the Court was made by K.KALYANASUNDARAM,J.) These writ appeals have been preferred against the common order passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.(MD)Nos.4069 of 2018 batch.

2. Pursuant to the fire broke out in Meenakshiamman Temple at

Madurai, the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department issued a Circular to evict all the tenants, who are in occupation of the property belongs to the H.R. & C.E. Department. Based on the Circular, eviction orders were issued against the tenants.

3. Aggrieved over the action, a batch of writ petitions came to be filed by the tenants. The learned single Judge was not inclined to entertain the writ petitions and the same were confirmed by the Division Bench.

4. The matter was taken up to the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos.3461 to 3505 of 2019. The Hon'ble Apex Court allowed the Civil Appeals by observing that the tenants could be evicted only under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. The relevant paragraphs which run thus: "13. Section 77 of the Act, 1959 deals with transfer of lands appurtenant to or adjoining religious institutions prohibited except in special cases. Section 78 deals with encroachment by persons on land or building belonging to charitable or religious institution or endowment and the eviction of encroachers. Section 79 deals with mode of eviction on failure of removal of the encroachment as directed by the Joint Commissioner.

Section 79-A deals with encroachment by groups of persons on land belonging to charitable religious institutions and their eviction. Section 79-B deals with penalty for offences in connection with encroachment. Section 79-C deals with recovery of moneys due to religious institutions, as arrears of land revenue. Section 80 deals with eviction of lessees, licensees or mortgagees with possession in certain cases.

80. Section 82 provides for payment of Compensation. Section 83 deals with constitution of Tribunal. Section 84 deals with suits against the award. Section 85 provides for protection of action taken under Chapter VII of the Act, 1959.

14. As mentioned above, the controversy, which is the subject matter of these appeals, is governed by the provisions of the Act, 1959. It is not in dispute that the respondents did not resort to the remedies provided to them under the Act against any of the appellants. In other words, it is not in dispute that the action taken by the respondents, which was impugned by the appellants in the writ petitions before the High Court, was not taken under the Act, 1959.

15.It is for this reason, we are inclined to allow these appeals, set aside the impugned order and grant liberty to the respondents to take recourse to the remedies provided to them against the appellants individually in

relation to the controversy raised by them in these proceedings.

16. Needless to say, we have not gone into the merits of the claim raised by the appellants whether individually or / and severally. The respondents will, therefore, be at liberty to proceed in the matter in question against the appellants individually strictly in accordance with law uninfluenced by any observations made by this Court. "

5. Following the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court, these writ appeals are allowed in the same terms and conditions. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) akv To The Assistant Commissioner / Executive Officer, Arulmigu Thayumanaswamy Temple, Rock Fort, Trichy.

+4CC TO MR.P.GANAPATHI SUBRAMANIAN, Advocate Sr. No.64532 TO 64535 +4CC TO MR.M.SARAVANAN, Advocate Sr. No. 64871 TO 64874 W.A.(MD).Nos.113 to 116 of 2019 30.04.2019 NS(CO) TR (31.05.2019) 3P 10C