Disposed¶54

G.Siva Kumar, v. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.

Madras HC9 Jun 2025WP/6229/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 34 HR&CE Act sanction for alienation of temple land; Kariyakaliamman Temple, Kinathukadavu, Pollachi Taluk; construction of Kinathukadavu Taluk/Tahsildar office on temple land; conveyance of 0.81.0 hectare in S.F.No.40 to revenue; 225% guideline value fixation (G.O.(MS) No.200 dated 2.11.2018); District Collector confirmation dated 28.02.2018; writ disposed with direction to grant sanction; no costs; Tamil Nadu.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to grant necessary sanction for conveyance of the property in favour of the revenue, enabling construction of the Taluk Office; no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions (W.M.P.Nos.5564, 5565 & 5566 of 2016) closed. The impugned proceedings were not quashed. ¶54

G.Siva Kumar, Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶54

Issue for consideration

Whether the proceedings of the second respondent dated 04.05.2013, under which steps were taken to construct the Kinathukadavu Taluk Office on the temple property without even getting permission of the Collector under Section 34 of the HR&CE Act, ought to be quashed. +1 more

¶33

Court's answer

From the counter affidavit filed by the third respondent and the materials placed before it, the Court found it clear that the total cost had already been finalised and that the second respondent had issued proceedings dated 28.02.2018 confirming the land value determined by the District Collector for the construction of the Taluk Office.

¶51

Ratio / Principle

In the light of the developments recorded in the counter affidavit, and in view of the fact that the land is being put to public use by paying the cost of the land to the temple, the Court directed the second respondent to grant necessary sanction for the conveyance of the property in favour of the revenue, so as to enable the revenue to construct the Taluk Office; the Court did not quash the impugned proceedings.

¶53

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No.6229 of 2016 (High Court of Judicature at Madras, N. Anand Venkatesh J., disposed of 09.06.2025): Petitioners sought a Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the District Collector's (second respondent) proceedings dated 04.05.2013, whereby construction of the Kinathukadavu Taluk Office commenced on 2.76.5 Hec. (out of 6.81.5 Hec.) of A/m. Kariyakaliamman Temple land in S.No.40, Kinathukadavu Village, allegedly without the Collector's permission under Section 34 of the HR&CE Act, and to compel adherence to Section 34. In its counter affidavit, the third respondent recorded that land value had been finalised - Rs.37,06,500 per hectare, Rs.30,02,265 for the 0.81.0 hectare actually required, loaded to 225% of guideline value (Rs.67,55,996) per G.O.(MS) No.200 dated 2.11.2018, with the Collector confirming the land value by proceedings dated 28.02.2018 and permission granted to sell at Rs.67,55,096 under sec 34 of Act 22/1959. Finding the land put to public use upon payment of its cost to the temple, the Court did not quash the impugned order but disposed of the petition, directing the second respondent to grant necessary sanction for conveyance of the property to the revenue for construction of the Taluk Office; no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

¶1

Writ Petition No.6229 of 2016

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 09.06.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

Writ Petition No.6229 of 2016 and

¶7

W.M.P.Nos.5564, 5565 & 5566 of 2016

¶8

G.Siva Kumar S/o.Late P.Ganapathy

¶9

2.K.Sathyaprakash, S/o.Late.R.Kailasam

¶10

Petitioners

¶11

¶12

The State of Tamil Nadu represented by the Secretary to the Govt., Dept. of Revenue, Fort St. George, Chennai600 009.

¶13

2.The District Collector, Coimbatore District, Coimbatore-18.

¶14

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Coimbatore, Coimbatore District.

¶15

4.The Commissioner, HR and CE Administration Department, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai-600 034.

¶16

1/8

¶17

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

¶18

Writ Petition No.6229 of 2016

¶19

5.The Executive Officer, A/m.Kariyakaliamman Temple, Kinathukadavu, Pollachi Taluk, Coimbatore District.

¶20

6.The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Buildings and Maintenance, Coimbatore.

¶21

7.The Tahsildar, Kinathukadavu Taluk, Coimbatore District.

¶22

Respondents

¶23

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order made in Na.Ka.No.21018/2011/AA dated 04.05.2013 passed by the second respondent, quash the same, and consequently direct the respondents to adhere to the mandate of section 34 of Hindu Charitable and Endowment Act, 1959 in respect of temple properties measuring an extent of 2.76.5 Hec., out of 6.81.5 Hec., in S.No.40, Kinathukadavu Village, Coimbatore District.

¶24

For Petitioners : Ms.M.N.Sumathy For Respondents : Mr.E.Vijay Anand Additional Government Pleader [R1 to R3] Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan Special Government Pleader [R4] *****

¶25

O R D E R

¶26

This writ petition has been filed challenging the proceedings of

¶27

the second respondent dated 04.05.2013 and for a consequential direction

¶28

2/8

¶29

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

¶30

Writ Petition No.6229 of 2016

¶31

to the respondents to adhere to the mandate under Section 34 of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act in respect of the subject property, which belongs to the Kariyakaliamman temple.

¶32

Heard Ms.M.N.Sumathy, learned counsel for petitioners, Mr.E.Vijay Anand, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for fourth respondent.

¶33

The main grievance expressed by the petitioners is that the subject property belongs to the temple, whereas steps are being taken to construct a Taluk Office without even getting permission of the Collector under Section 34 of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act. During the pendency of the writ petition, a counter affidavit came to be filed by the third respondent. The relevant portions are extracted hereunder:

¶34

“6. I respectfully submit that the said property does not belong to any Trust. It is a property of under the control of Government of Tamil Nadu. Hence under sec.34 of the HR & CE Act, 1959 the procedure for fixing land value of the land was under processes. In the meanwhile the petitioner file a writ petition No.6229 of 2016 in this Hon'ble Court prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue writ, order, or direction

¶35

3/8

¶36

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

¶37

Writ Petition No.6229 of 2016

¶38

specifically writ in the nature of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order made in Na.Ka.No.2108/2011/A4 dated 4.05.2013 passed by the 2^nd respondent, quash the same and the respondents to adhere to the mandate under Sec.34 of Hindu Charitable and Endowment Act 1959 in respect of Temple Properties measuring an extent of 2.76.5 hectare out of 6.81.5 hectare in S.No.4, Kinathukadavu Village, Coimbatore District.

¶39

I respectfully submit that, as per the Government policy, the Pollachi Taluk bifurcated in to Two Taluk, one is Pollachi Taluk and another one is Kinathukadavu Taluk and accordingly G.O.(MS) 406 dated 21.11.2002 was issued by the Government of Tamilnadu. It is submitted that in order act upon the above G.O. the District Collector approached the Commissioner, HR & CE, Administrative Department, Chennai for construction of Kinathukadavu Taluk office and request to transfer the land in S.F.No.40 of A/M Kariakaliamman Temple land an extent of 2.76.5 hectare out of 6.81.5 hectare on payment of land value cost, and the same was agreed subject to the condition that land value to be at the rate 150% value and remitted to HR & CE Department. In order to speed up the construction of Tahsildar office, the District Collector issued order to center upon of permission to the 6^th respondent in Na.Ka.No.2108/2011/B4 Dated 4.5.2013 and started the construction which is in progress and may likely to complete the construction within stipulated period of time. It is further submitted that the petitioner is no way connected with the above subject matter of land. The transfer of land is order between the District Collector and HR & CE Department, since the land and Temple situated therein are under the control of HR & CE Department and maintained by the Executive Officer.

¶40

I respectfully submit that in the meantime the 2^nd respondent with references to the Sub-Registrar Kinathukadavu vide his Na.Ka.No.2/2018 dated 10.05.2018, GO.(MS) 200, Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments ((RE4-2) Department dated 02.11.2018, District Revenue Officer vide Na.Ka.No.2108/2011/B4 dated 11.12.2018 and the Joint Commissioner, Coimbatore vide Na.Ka.No.10081/2018/A4 dated 20.12.2018 and 10.01.2019 have been examined in detail to fix the land value of 0.81.0 hectare which is required for the

¶41

4/8

¶42

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

¶43

Writ Petition No.6229 of 2016

¶44

construction of newly created Taluk office at Kinathukadavu. The market value and the guideline value have been examined as per the procedure, the sale price of the land sold within radius of 1.6 Kms. from the Temple land has been taken into account, the price has been fixed per Hectare as Rs.37,06,500/ (Thirty Seven lakhs six thousand and five hundred only) even though the requirement of land for New Taluk Office is only 0.81.0 hectare is arrived at Rs.30,02,265/-. Since land is available in urban area and as per the GO (MS) No.200 Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments (RE4-2) Department dated 2.11.2018 the land values of 225% based on the guideline value has been fixed as (30,02,265 x 225%) = Rs.67,55,996/- vide in Na.Ka.No.65825/2014 (M.2 dated 11.2.2019 by the 2^nd respondent and communicated to the District Collector, Coimbatore, the lands belongs to the Hindu Religious institutions under section 34 of Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act 1959 for the public purpose to Government Departments and if agree for the above payment, action will be taken and place before Government with recommendation under sec.34, HR & CE for obtaining order.

¶45

I respectfully submit that the conformation of the above payment has been communicated by the District Collector vide Ne.Mu Na.Ka.No.21018/2011/B4 dated 28.02.2018 to the 2^nd respondent. The 2^nd respondent initiated action with reference to the various correspondence and informed to the Additional Chief Secretary, Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments Department vide Na.Ka.No.65825/2014/M2/dated 14.03.2019 and stated that permission has been granted to the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Administration Department, Chennai that the land belong to the Kariakaliamman Koil in S.F.No.40 and extent of 0.81.0 hectare can be sold for construction of Taluk office under the guideline value of Rs.67,55,096/- (Rupees Sixty Seven lakhs fifty five thousand and ninety six only) for sale consideration under sec 34 of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act 22/1959.”

¶46

It is clear from the counter affidavit filed by the third

¶47

respondent and also the materials placed before this Court that the total

¶48

5/8

¶49

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

¶50

Writ Petition No.6229 of 2016

¶51

cost has already been finalised and the second respondent has issued proceedings dated 28.02.2018 by confirming the land value determined by the District Collector for the construction of the Taluk Office.

¶52

In the light of the above development and in view of the fact

¶53

that the land is being put to public use by paying the cost of the land to the temple, there shall be a direction to the second respondent to grant necessary sanction for the conveyance of the property in favour of the revenue in order to enable the revenue to construct the Taluk Office.

¶54

This writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶55

09.06.2025

¶56

Neutral Citation: Yes/No Index: Yes/no Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order gm

¶57

6/8

¶58

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

¶59

Writ Petition No.6229 of 2016

¶60

¶61

The Secretary to the Govt., Dept. of Revenue, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

¶62

2.The District Collector, Coimbatore District, Coimbatore-18.

¶63

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Coimbatore, Coimbatore District.

¶64

4.The Commissioner, HR and CE Administration Department, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai-600 034.

¶65

5.The Executive Officer, A/m.Kariyakaliamman Temple, Kinathukadavu, Pollachi Taluk, Coimbatore District.

¶66

6.The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Buildings and Maintenance, Coimbatore.

¶67

7.The Tahsildar, Kinathukadavu Taluk, Coimbatore District.

¶68

7/8

¶69

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

¶70

Writ Petition No.6229 of 2016

¶71

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J

¶72

¶73

Writ Petition No.6229 of 2016

¶74

09.06.2025

¶75

8/8

¶76

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

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Proceedings dated 04.05.2013 passed by the second respondent (District Collector, Coimbatore), whose quashing was sought together with a consequential direction to adhere to Section 34 of the HR&CE Act in respect of the temple property; per the counter affidavit, it conveyed the Collector's permission to commence construction of the Kinathukadavu Taluk Office on the temple land.¶23
Second respondent - District Collector, Coimbatore District · 04.05.2013
Prior proceeding
Bifurcation of Pollachi Taluk into Pollachi Taluk and Kinathukadavu Taluk as per Government policy; G.O.(MS) 406 dated 21.11.2002 issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu.¶39
Prior proceeding
To implement the G.O., the District Collector approached the Commissioner, HR & CE for transfer of 2.76.5 hectares out of 6.81.5 hectares in S.F.No.40 of A/M Kariakaliamman Temple land for the Kinathukadavu Taluk office on payment of land value cost; HR & CE agreed subject to land value being fixed at the rate of 150% and remitted to the HR & CE Department.¶39
Prior proceeding
To speed up construction of the Tahsildar office, the District Collector ordered permission to the sixth respondent (Executive Engineer, PWD) in Na.Ka.No.2108/2011/B4 dated 4.5.2013; construction commenced and was in progress.¶39
Prior proceeding
Land value of the 0.81.0 hectare required for the newly created Taluk office at Kinathukadavu examined in detail with reference to the Sub-Registrar, Kinathukadavu (Na.Ka.No.2/2018 dated 10.05.2018), G.O.(MS) 200, Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments ((RE4-2) Department dated 02.11.2018), the District Revenue Officer (Na.Ka.No.2108/2011/B4 dated 11.12.2018) and the Joint Commissioner, Coimbatore (Na.Ka.No.10081/2018/A4 dated 20.12.2018 and 10.01.2019).¶40
Prior proceeding
Market value and guideline value examined as per procedure; sale price of land sold within a 1.6 km radius of the temple land taken into account; price fixed per hectare at Rs.37,06,500, arriving at Rs.30,02,265 for the 0.81.0 hectare required for the New Taluk Office.¶44
Prior proceeding
Since the land is in an urban area, per G.O.(MS) No.200, Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments (RE4-2) Department dated 2.11.2018, land values were fixed at 225% based on guideline value: (30,02,265 x 225%) = Rs.67,55,996 vide Na.Ka.No.65825/2014 (M.2 dated 11.2.2019) communicated to the District Collector; if the payment is agreed, action would be placed before Government with recommendation under sec.34, HR & CE.¶44
Prior proceeding
Confirmation of the payment communicated by the District Collector vide Ne.Mu Na.Ka.No.21018/2011/B4 dated 28.02.2018; the second respondent informed the Additional Chief Secretary, Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments Department vide Na.Ka.No.65825/2014/M2 dated 14.03.2019 that permission had been granted to sell 0.81.0 hectare of Kariakaliamman Koil land in S.F.No.40 for construction of the Taluk office at the guideline value of Rs.67,55,096 under sec 34 of Act 22/1959.¶45

G.Siva Kumar, v. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Siva Kumar, v. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Krishnamoorthi Vs the Regional Passport Officer

V.Sadasivam Vs the District Collector

Pioneer Jellice India Private limited Vs the State of Tamilnadu

Dr.v. Prem Anand, B.S.M.S., Vs the Central Registrar of Co-Operative Societies

Chandgari Munna Vs the Tahsildar

The Church of South India Trust Vs the State of Tamilnadu