S.Nalini Vs the Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

S.Nalini Vs the Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the third respondent (Sub Registrar) to deal with the document presented for registration in line with the guidelines in Sudha Ravikumar (2017 (3) CTC 135, Paragraphs 25 and 26) and to take a decision within four weeks after affording an opportunity to the petitioner and the second respondent; writ petition disposed of in the above terms with no costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the first respondent (Commissioner, HR&CE Department) should be directed to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 24.02.2025 seeking a No Objection Certificate. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

The third respondent (Sub Registrar) shall deal with the document presented for registration in line with the guidelines given at Paragraphs 25 and 26 of Sudha Ravikumar v. Special Commissioner, HR and CE Department and Others (2017 (3) CTC 135), and shall take a decision within four weeks from receipt of a copy of this order, after affording an opportunity to the petitioner and the second respondent.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (High Court of Judicature at Madras, decided 04-06-2025 by N. Anand Venkatesh J.) — Petitioner S. Nalini, claiming to be absolute owner of a subject property, sought a No Objection Certificate from the HR and CE Department (representation dated 24.02.2025 to the Commissioner) because the Executive Officer of Arulmigu Vanji Amman Thirukovil disputes her ownership and the Sub Registrar, Moolanur refuses to register the document without such certificate; the representation was not acted upon. In the considered view of the Court, the third respondent can deal with the document presented for registration in line with the decision in Sudha Ravikumar v. Special Commissioner, HR and CE Department and Others, 2017 (3) CTC 135, wherein guidelines were given at Paragraphs 25 and 26; the Sub Registrar is to take a decision within four weeks of receipt of a copy of the order, after affording an opportunity to the petitioner and the second respondent. Writ petition disposed of in the above terms; no costs.

W.P No. 18616 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 04-06-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

W.P No. 18616 of 2025

S.Nalini

S/o Srinivasan, Door No 112, Muthu Vikram Apartment, Sanjay Nagar, Narayanavalasu, Erode Town, Erode Rep By Her Power Agent Rajalakshmi Door No 28a, Sanarpalayam Moolanur, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District

... Petitioner

Vs

The Commissioner

Hindu Religious And Charitable Endowments Department, No 119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034

2.The Executive Officer

Arulmigu Vanji Amman Thirukovil, Moolanur, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District

3.The Sub Registrar Moolanur Tiruppur District

... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 24.02.2025.

1/5

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

W.P No. 18616 of 2025

For Petitioner : Mr.A.B.Rajasekaran For Respondents: Mr.S.Ravichandran Additional Government Pleader -for RR 1 and 2 Mr.Abishekmurthy - for R3

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking for the issuance of a Writ of

Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 24.02.2025, wherein the petitioner has sought for No Objection Certificate from the HR and CE Department to enable the petitioner to deal with the subject property and register the document on the file of the third respondent.

Heard Mr.A.B.Rajasekaran, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.S.Ravichandran, learned Additional Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.Abhishekmurthy learned counsel for the third respondent.

The petitioner claims to be the absolute owner of the subject property. The same is disputed by the second respondent temple and hence the third respondent is refusing to register the document and is insisting for No Objection Certificate from the second respondent. The representation made by the petitioner to the first respondent seeking for a No Objection Certificate

2/5

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

W.P No. 18616 of 2025

was not acted upon. It is under these circumstances the present writ petition came to be filed before this Court.

In the considered view of this Court, the third respondent can deal with the document presented for registration in line with the decision of this Court in Sudha Ravikumar -vs- Special Commissioner, HR and CE Department and Others reported in 2017 (3) CTC 135, wherein guidelines were given at Paragraphs 25 and 26 of the judgment. A decision shall be taken by the third respondent within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after affording an opportunity to the petitioner and the second respondent.

This writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs.

04-06-2025

KST Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No

3/5

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

W.P No. 18616 of 2025

To

1.The Commissioner Hindu Religious And Charitable Endowments Department, No 119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034

2.The Executive Officer Arulmigu Vanji Amman Thirukovil, Moolanur, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District

3.The Sub Registrar Moolanur Tiruppur District

4/5

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

W.P No. 18616 of 2025

N.ANAND VENKATESH J.

KST

WP No. 18616 of 2025

04-06-2025

5/5

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