Allowed

Arulmigu Vilva Vananathaswamy Temple v. The State Rep by

Madras HC4 Nov 2022WP(MD)/22147/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, exercising power under Article 226, directed the District Revenue Officer, Tenkasi to hold an enquiry and pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's temple's applications regarding defects in updating land registry cases within 16 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's temple applications dated 21.06.2021 and 01.09.2021 must be enquired into and disposed of expeditiously within 16 weeks by the District Revenue Officer.

Arulmigu Vilva Vananathaswamy Temple Vs The State Rep by — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.(MD).No.22147 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 04.11.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

¶6

W.P.(MD).No.22147 of 2022

¶7

Arulmigu Vilva Vananathaswamy Temple, Kadayam through its Executive Officer, Kadayam, Tenkasi Taluk, Tenkasi District. ... Petitioner

¶8

vs.

¶9

1.The State represented by the Commissioner, Land Reforms, Ezhilagam, Chennai.

¶10

2.The District Collector, Tenkasi District, Tenkasi.

¶11

3.The District Revenue Officer, Tenkasi District, Tenkasi.

¶12

... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent to dispose the original applications dated 21.06.2021 and

¶14

1/5

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

W.P.(MD).No.22147 of 2022

¶17

01.09.2021 in respect of Nanja and Punja lands situated at Keela Kadayam -I, Keela Kadayam -2, Mela Kaayam and Therku Kadayam Village, Tenkasi Taluk, Tenkasi District filed by the petitioner's temple, as per G.O.(Ms.).No.385, dated 17.08.2004, with regard to rectify the defects in updating the registry cases (UDR) within a stipulated period as fixed by this Curt.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Chellapandian For Respondents : Mr.C.Satheesh Government Advocate

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent to dispose the original applications dated 21.06.2021 and 01.09.2021 in respect of Nanja and Punja lands situated at Keela Kadayam -I, Keela Kadayam -2, Mela Kaayam and Therku Kadayam Village, Tenkasi Taluk, Tenkasi District filed by the petitioner's temple, as per G.O.(Ms.).No.385, dated 17.08.2004, with regard to rectify the defects in updating the registry cases (UDR).

¶21

2/5

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶23

W.P.(MD).No.22147 of 2022

¶24

When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents would submit that the petitioner's applications dated 21.06.2021 and 01.09.2021 were considered by the District Revenue Officer, Tenkasi and for rectifying the defects in the UDR, notices have been issued to 39 persons in Melakadayam fixing the date of hearing as 03.11.2022, 121 persons in Keelakadayam Part-I fixing the date of hearing as 10.11.2022, 483 persons in Keelakadayam Part-II fixing the date of hearing as 01.12.2022, 08.12.2022 and 15.12.2022 and totally 643 petitions have been received and they will hold an enquiry on the specified dates and appropriate orders will be passed.

¶25

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

¶26

Considering the submissions made by the learned Government

¶27

Advocate, this Court directs the District Revenue Officer, Tenkasi, the third respondent herein to hold an enquiry on the specified dates, on the petitioner's applications dated 21.06.2021 and 01.09.2021 and pass

¶28

3/5

¶29

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶30

W.P.(MD).No.22147 of 2022

¶31

appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 16 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶32

With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No

costs.

04.11.2022

akv

1.The Commissioner, State of Tamil Nadu, Land Reforms, Ezhilagam, Chennai.

¶38

2.The District Collector, Tenkasi District, Tenkasi.

¶39

3.The District Revenue Officer, Tenkasi District, Tenkasi

¶40

4/5

¶41

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶42

W.P.(MD).No.22147 of 2022

¶43

V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J.

¶44

akv

¶45

W.P.(MD).No.22147 of 2022

¶46

04.11.2022

¶47

5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Arulmigu Vilva Vananathaswamy Temple v. The State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arulmigu Vilva Vananathaswamy Temple v. The State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A. Bootharaj Vs T.Anbalagan

M.R.Rajasekaran, Vs K. Baskaran

Velanganni Vs The Tahsildar

Vins Vs The Regional Passport Officer

Karthick Veeranan Vs The Regional Passport Offficer

Moorthy C Vs The Sub-Registrar