T.Selvam v. The Joint Commissioner of Hindu

JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was made by R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.) The petitioners in W.P(MD)No.24994 of 2019 have preferred the present writ appeal challenging the dismissal of the writ petition.

¶2The petitioners herein had filed W.P(MD)No.24994 of 2019 seeking a writ of mandamus forbearing the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kulithalai, Karur District from mutating the revenue records from their name to the name of the sixth respondent temple in the light of the order dated 20.06.1988 in S.T.A.Nos.145 to 245 of 1978 batch cases.

¶3According to the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners, the properties in dispute are Inam lands and the title has been declared in their favour in S.T.A.Nos.145 to 245 of 1978 batch cases by the High Court by an order dated 20.06.1988. Ignoring the said order, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kulithalai has issued notices to the petitioners to appear for an enquiry at the instance of the representation given by the sixth respondent temple for mutation of the patta in favour of the temple. The Writ Court had proceeded to dismiss the writ petition on the ground that in connected matters patta has already been mutated in favour of the temple and therefore, the writ petition has become infructuous.

¶4The grievance of the appellants is that as far as the appellants are concerned, pattas continues to stand in the name of private individuals and it has not been mutated.

¶5The learned counsel appearing for the sixth respondent temple submits that Inam lands were resumed by the temple and patta was also transferred in the name of the temple. However, now the patta transferred in the name of some individuals, therefore, a representation was given to the Revenue Divisional Officer on 30.07.2019 seeking to restore the patta in the name of the temple.

¶6However, the learned counsel for the appellants submit that sofar the temple has not resumed the lands either under the HR & CE Act or under the Tamil Nadu Minor Inams (Abolition and Conversion Into Ryotwari) Act, 1963[2].

¶7In view of the fact that the notices issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer have not been put to challenge but the prayer is only for a mandamus, we are not inclined to entertain the writ appeal. However, it is open to both the parties to place all the records before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kulithalai to ventilate their grievances. The Revenue Divisional Officer is directed to consider the request of the sixth respondent on merits and in accordance with law without being influenced by any of the observations made by this Court, after giving due opportunities to the writ petitioners.

¶8Accordingly, the writ appeal is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (C.V.K., J.) (R.V., J.)

23.10.2025 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No am To

1.The Joint Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Trichy.

2.The District Collector, Karur District, Karur.

3.The District Revenue Officer, Kulithalai, Karur District.

4.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kulithalai, Karur District.

5.The Tahsildar, Kulithalai Taluk, Kulithalai, Karur District.

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J. and

R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J. am

23.10.2025

BEFOREoTHEoMADURAIoBENCHoOFoMADRASoHIGHoCOURT DATEDo:o23.10.2025 CORAM: THEoHONOURABLEoMR.JUSTICEoC.V.KARTHIKEYAN and THEoHON'BLEoMR.JUSTICEoR.VIJAYAKUMAR W.A(MD)No.328oofo2020 and C.M.P(MD)No.2245oofo2020 1.T.Selvam 2.T.Sampurnam 3.T.Muthuveeran 4.T.Manohar 5.Mr.R.Ganapathi 6.R.Tirunavukkarasu 7.R.AshokoKumar 8.P.Subramanian 9.V.Viswanathan 10.V.Gopi 11.M.Maruthai 12.M.Rajalingam 13.B.Arunachalam 14.M.Govindaraj 15.V.Karunanithi 16.M.Sivapakkiam 17.M.Selvakumar 18.M.Deepak 19.B.Ponusamy 20.R.Saravanan 21.S.Santhi 22.Vellaisamy 23.K.Ramesh o ooooo...oAppellants/Petitioners Vs 1.The Joint Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Trichy. 2.The District Collector, Karur District, Karur. 3.The District Revenue Officer, Kulithalai, Karur District. 4.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kulithalai, Karur District. 5.The Tahsildar, Kulithalai Taluk, Kulithalai, Karur District. 6.The Executive Officer/Administrator Arulmigu Rathinagireeswarar Thirukovil, Ayyarmalai, Kulithalai Taluk, Karur District. ...Respondents/Respondents PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside the order dated 31.01.2020 made in W.P(MD)No.24994 of 2019 and allow this writ appeal. For Appellants : Mr.R.Murali for Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan For R1 : Mr.P.Subbaraj Special Government Pleader For R2 to R5 : Mr.S.R.A.Ramachandran Additional Government Pleader For R6 : Mr.P.Athimoolapandian