Disposed

C.Manoharan, v. the District Collector

Madras HC1 Feb 2018WP(MD)/2115/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought mandamus to remove encroachments on temple lands and restrain private respondents from preventing festival conduct. The court directed the fourth respondent to investigate possession and issue notices to private respondents within three months before deciding the merits.

What did the court decide?

Directing the fourth respondent to put respondents 5 and 6 on notice and investigate possession within three months before taking action.

C.Manoharan, Vs the District Collector — Property and Title | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 01.02.2018 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA

¶4

W.P(MD)No. 2115 of 2018 and W.M.P(MD)No.2368 of 2018

¶5

C.Manoharan .. Petitioner

¶6

Vs. 1.The District Collector, Karur District, Karur. 2.The Block Development Officer, Kadavur Union, Tharagampatti, Kadavur Taluk, Karur District. 3.The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable endowments, Karur, Karur District. 4.The Tahsildar, Kadavur Taluk, Tharagampatti, Karur District. 5.R.Aandiappan 6.R.Mariyappan .. Respondents

¶7

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to remove the encroachments in Temple lands having total extent of 17 acres and 70 cents situated in Survey Nos.753/2, 312, 423/3, 427/2, 304/6 at Sembiyanantham Village, Kadavur Taluk, Karur District by taking action against the respondents 5 and 6.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Shankarganesh

¶9

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶10

¶11

For Respondents : Mr.M.Murugan, Government Advocate for R.1, R.3 and R.4

¶12

: Mr.B.Bhagavathi Government Advocate for R.2

¶13

ORDER

¶14

[Order of the Court was made by M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.]

¶15

By consent, this writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

¶16

Mr.M.Murugan, learned Government Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents 1, 3 and 4 and Mr.B.Bhagavathi, learned Government Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of the second respondent.

¶17

The petitioner, on an earlier occasion, filed in W.P.(MD). No.1247 of 2018 against the fourth respondent as well as the second respondent herein, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the fourth respondent, dated 30.10.2017 and quash the same with consequential direction directing him to permit the petitioner trust to conduct the “Kudamuzhukku” festival of the Sri Kaliamman Temple situated at Rayappagoundanoor, Sembinatham, Kadavoor Taluk, Karur District scheduled to be held on 11.02.2018 and the said writ petition has been entertained, however no interim orders are in operation.

¶18

The present grievance expressed by the petitioner from his representation, dated 22.01.2018, appears to be that the private respondents, not only encroached upon the lands belonging to Arulmigu Sri Kaliamman Temple and Vinayagar Temple, but also earning income out of the said encroachment and not permitting the residents of the Rayappagoundanoor to celebrate the temple festival in a peaceful manner.

¶19

Heard the submissions of the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocates appearing for the respondents.

¶20

Though the petitioner prays for a larger relief, this Court, in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case and without going into the merits of the case projected by the petitioner either in his representation dated 22.01.2018 or in this https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Writ Petition, directs the fourth respondent to put the private respondents 5 and 6 on notice and to find out as to whether Arulmigu

¶21

¶22

Sri Kaliamman Temple and Vinayagar Temple of Rayappagoundanoor, Sembinatham, Kadavoor Taluk, Karur District are in possession of the lands and also as to the existence of pathway and depending upon the result of the same, shall take appropriate action in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the decision taken to the petitioner as well as to the private respondents.

¶23

6.This Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

Assistant Registrar(CSI) /True Copy/

¶26

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶27

¶28

1.The District Collector, Karur District, Karur. 2.The Block Development Officer, Kadavur Union, Tharagampatti, Kadavur Taluk, Karur District.

¶29

3.The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable endowments, Karur, Karur District.

¶30

4.The Tahsildar, Kadavur Taluk, Tharagampatti, Karur District

¶31

+One cc to The Special Government Pleader, SR.No.46216 +One cc to Mr.R.Shankar Ganesh, Advocate, SR.No.45640

¶32

ssl/vsg

¶33

RL/7C/3P/SV/MMS/SAR1/20/2/2018

¶34

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶35

ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No. 2115 of 2018 01.02.2018

C.Manoharan, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Manoharan, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Devaraj, Vs the Secretary to Govt.

Arulmigu Sri Varasithi Vs the Chief Engineer

Nethaji, Vs the District Collector

M.Anandhan Vs a.Dhakshinamoorthy(Died)

N.Sadasivam Vs Rajesh

Nagarajan Vs the District Collector