Sivalingam v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 11.12.2020

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. KIRUBAKARAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI Sivalingam ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector,

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer,

3. The Tahsildar, Ponnamaravathi Taluk,

4. The Block Development Officer, Ponnamaravathi Panchayat Union,

5. The President, Koppanapatti Village Panchayat,

6. The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Muthumariamman Thirukovil, Konnaiyur, Ponnamaravathi,

7. Rajamanikam

8. SP.Murugasan

9. Mayandi

10. Ganesan

11. Jeya

12. Santha

13. Valamathi

14. Vellaiyammal

15. Nallammal

16. Chellam

17. Veluchamy

18. Sivanathan

19. Karuppaiah

20. Govindhan 1/6

21. Muthulakshmi

22. Saroja

23. Chinnathambi ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 to 5 to remove the encroachments made by the respondents 6 to 23 in R.S.No.49/1, Konnaiyur Village, Ponnamaravathi Taluk and Pudukottai District, within the stipulated time.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Balakrishnan For Respondents : Mr.M.Muthugeethaiyan, Special Government Pleader for R1 to R4 Mr.G.Madhavan for R6

ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by N. KIRUBAKARAN, J.] This writ petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 to 5 to remove the encroachments made by the respondents 6 to 23 in R.S.No.49/1, Konnaiyur Village, Ponnamaravathi Taluk and Pudukottai District, within the stipulated time.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the property in R.S.No.49/1, Konnaiyur Village, Ponnamaravathi Taluk, Pudukottai District, is originally a Natham Poramboke Land and near the said land, Arulmigu Muthumariamman Thirukovil is located and the land surrounding the said Muthumariamman Temple is being encroached upon by the private respondents. Therefore, the petitioner gave a representation on 10.09.2020 in this regard. Since no action has been taken by the official respondents, the petitioner has come before this Court to remove the encroachments.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Muthugeethaiyan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 and Mr.G.Madhavan, learned counsel appearing for the sixth respondent/Temple.

4. Though Mr.G.Madhavan, learned counsel appearing for the sixth respondent/Temple submits that it is a Temple land and action is being taken under the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), Mr.M.Muthugeethaiyan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 4, by relying upon the proceedings of the Tahsildar and the Adangal Register maintained by the Revenue Authorities, submitted that 1 Acre 18 Cents is a Government poramboke land, in which, the land in dispute is situated. Therefore, if action is being taken 2/6

under HR&CE Act, it will be a prolonged one and it will enable the encroachers to squat upon the property in question. Moreover, the Temple itself is located in the poramboke land. Therefore, it is the right of the revenue authorities to remove the encroachments made by the private respondents.

5. It is also seen from the typed set of papers that the encroachers already filed writ petitions in W.P.(MD)Nos. 9991 to 9997 of 2009 seeking patta and this Court, by order, dated 07.10.2009, directed the Revenue Authorities to consider the same. Pursuant to the said order, the Revenue Authorities considered the claim of the encroachers and came to the conclusion that the patta was sought for commercial purpose and therefore, rejected their claim for issuance of patta.

6. When such a decision has been taken by the Revenue Authorities and the Revenue Records itself show that the Temple is located in sarkar poramboke land, it is appropriate to direct the 3rd respondent to issue notice to the private respondents and take action as per law, after hearing all the parties, within a period of 12 weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In case of eviction of private respondents, the land should be handed over to the Temple. It is made clear that after giving notice to the private respondents only, the 3rd respondent can proceed by invoking the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act.

7. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Crl.Side) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) ogy Note:In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned. To

1. The District Collector,

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, 3/6

3. The Tahsildar, Ponnamaravathi Taluk,

4. The Block Development Officer, Ponnamaravathi Panchayat Union,

5. The President, Koppanapatti Village Panchayat,

6. The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Muthumariamman Thirukovil, Konnaiyur, Ponnamaravathi, +1cc to the SPL GP SR.No.25397.

11.12.2020 SRK(CO) CS(06.01.2021) 4P 8C 4/6