Disposed

The President v. The Commissioner

Madras HC17 Dec 2025WP(MD)/34781/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petitions challenged a revenue order directing collection of land tax on Munchirai Mutt properties granted as patta to private individuals. The court noted the Sub Collector had already initiated patta cancellation proceedings and directed completion within six months, with HR & CE to recover property under the TN HR&CE Act thereafter.

What did the court decide?

Directions: Sub Collector to complete patta cancellation within six months; HR & CE Department to recover Mutt property under Sections 78 and 80 TN HR&CE Act; writ petitions disposed without costs.

The President Vs The Commissioner — Property and Title | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD) Nos.34781 & 12463 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENGH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 17.12.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶6

W.P.(MD)Nos.34781 & 12463 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.27483, 27486, 28578, 9081 & 9082 of 2025

¶7

The President,

¶8

Hindu Mutt and Hindu Properties

¶9

Protection Association,

¶10

S.Jothilingam Raj, S/o. V.Singararajan, 5/7E, Lakshmi Bhawan,

¶11

Santharamkuzhi, Marthandam Post, Kanyakumari District.

¶12

... Petitioner in

¶13

W.P.(MD)No.34781/2025

¶14

Munchirai Mutt,

¶15

Represented by its Administrative Officer, Munchirai Village, Killiyur Taluk, Kanyakumari District.

¶16

... Petitioner in

¶17

W.P.(MD)No.12463/2025

¶18

¶19

The Commissioner, HR and CE Department, Chennai.

¶20

1/8

¶21

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

¶22

W.P.(MD) Nos.34781 & 12463 of 2025

¶23

The District Collector, Kanyakumari District at Nagercoil

¶24

The District Revenue Officer, Kanyakumari District at Nagercoil

¶25

The Joint Commissioner, HR and CE Department, Tirunelveli District.

¶26

The Sub Collector, Padmanabapuram, Kanyakumari District.

¶27

The Assistant Commissioner, HR and CE Department, Nagercoil.

¶28

The Tahsildar, Killiyoor Taluk, Kanyakumari District.

¶29

The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Kanni Vinayagar Temple and Thokuppu Temple, South Car Street, H.R and C.E. Department, Vadiveeswaram, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

¶30

... Respondents in W.P.(MD)No.34781/2025

¶31

The District Collector, Kanniyakumari District, At Nagercoil.

¶32

The District Revenue Officer, Kanniyakumari District.

¶33

The Sub Collector, Padmanabhapuram, Kanniyakumari District.

¶34

2/8

¶35

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

¶36

W.P.(MD) Nos.34781 & 12463 of 2025

¶37

4. The Tahsildhar, Killiyur Taluk, Kanniyakumari District.

¶38

... Respondents in W.P.(MD)No.12463/2025

¶39

Prayer in W.P.(MD)No.34781/2025: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to impugned order passed by 3^rd respondent vide his proceedings Letter No.M4/5220/2024 dated 27.03.2025 quash the same as illegal and consequently restraining the respondents 2, 3 and 6 and their subordinates from collecting land tax or issuing further pattas for encroachers in respect of Mutt properties at Kanyakumari District, Killiyoor Taluk, Munchirai Village in Re.Sy.Nos. 297/3 to 312/13 and Arudesam Village in Re.Sys.No.116/3 to 449/14.

¶40

Prayer in W.P.(MD)No.12463/2025: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings in M4/ 5220/2024 dated 27.03.2025 issued by the 2^nd respondent and quash the same and consequently forbear the respondents from demanding or collecting tax in any form for the lands in S.Nos. 116/3 to 449/14 in Arudesam Village, Killiyoor Taluk, Kanyakumari District, belonging to Munchirai Mutt and also directing the respondents 2 to 4 to restore the revenue records for the said lands to the name of the said Mutt.

¶41

3/8

¶42

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

¶43

W.P.(MD) Nos.34781 & 12463 of 2025

¶44

W.P.(MD)No.34781/2025

¶45

For Petitioner	: Mr.K.P.Narayanakumar
For R espondents	: Mr.K.Balasubramani,
	Spl. Govt. Pleader for R1 to R7
	Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan for R8

¶46

W.P.(MD)No.12463/2025

¶47

For Petitioner	: Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan
For R espondents	: Mr.K.Balasubramani,
	Spl. Govt. Pleader

¶48

COMMON ORDER

¶49

These Writ Petitions are filed challenging the impugned

¶50

order dated 27.03.2025 passed by the District Revenue Officer, Kanyakumari District, wherein a direction was given to collect land tax again from the patta holders.

¶51

2. According to the petitioners, the subject lands are the

¶52

properties of Munchirai Mutt. However, some private individuals have obtained patta in respect of the Mutt properties. Hence, the petitioners gave several representations to take necessary action and to cancel the

¶53

4/8

¶54

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

¶55

W.P.(MD) Nos.34781 & 12463 of 2025

¶56

patta granted to the private individuals. However, till date, no steps were taken to cancel the patta granted in favour of the private individuals. In the meantime, the District Revenue Officer, Kanyakumiar District through the impugned order, directed to collect tax from the patta holders. Challenging the same, the petitioners have filed these Writ Petitions.

¶57

3 . The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would

¶58

submit that the subject properties belonged to the Mutt. However, the Tahsildar, Killiyoor Taluk, Kanyakumari District without any consent from either Mutt or HR&CE Department, issued patta in favour of several individuals. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners further submit that the properties dedicate for public and religious purpose cannot be alienated for private gain and there is no legal provision to collect tax from encroachers or unauthorized occupants of temple or mutt properties. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the District Revenue Officer, Kanyakumari District is liable to be dismissed.

¶59

4. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that since the subject lands are temple

¶60

5/8

¶61

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

¶62

W.P.(MD) Nos.34781 & 12463 of 2025

¶63

properties, Administrative Officer of the Munchirai Mutt, made a request to the 5^th respondent to cancel the patta issued in the name of the private individuals. Based on the said request, the Sub-Collector, Padmanabapuram has already initiated proceedings to cancel the patta issued in the name of the private individuals. Therefore, if the patta is cancelled, all the occupants have been considered as encroachers and thereafter, necessary action would be taken to remove the said encroachers.

¶64

5. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that time frame may be fixed for cancellation of patta proceedings, since already three months have been lapsed.

¶65

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that already patta has been granted to the thousands of people and now the Sub Collector, Padmanabapuram, Kanyakumari District has initiated proceedings to cancel the patta issued to the said private individuals. Therefore, the Sub Collector, Padmanabapuram, Kanyakumari District is directed to complete the entire cancellation of the patta proceedings within a period of six months from the date of

¶66

6/8

¶67

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

¶68

W.P.(MD) Nos.34781 & 12463 of 2025

¶69

receipt of a copy of this order. It is needless to say, thereafter, the HR & CE Department shall take necessary actions to recover the property in terms of the Provisions of Sections 78 and 80 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959.

¶70

7. With the above directions, these Writ Petitions are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶71

17.12.2025

¶72

Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶73

vsm

¶74

¶75

The Commissioner, HR and CE Department, Chennai.

¶76

The District Collector, Kanyakumari District at Nagercoil

¶77

The District Revenue Officer, Kanyakumari District at Nagercoil

¶78

7/8

¶79

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

¶80

W.P.(MD) Nos.34781 & 12463 of 2025

¶81

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.

¶82

vsm

¶83

The Joint Commissioner, HR and CE Department, Tirunelveli District.

¶84

The Sub Collector, Padmanabapuram, Kanyakumari District.

¶85

The Assistant Commissioner, HR and CE Department, Nagercoil.

¶86

The Tahsildar, Killiyoor Taluk, Kanyakumari District.

¶87

The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Kanni Vinayagar Temple and Thokuppu Temple, South Car Street, H.R and C.E. Department, Vadiveeswaram, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

¶88

W.P.(MD)Nos.34781 & 12463 of 2025

¶89

17.12.2025

¶90

8/8

¶91

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

The President v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The President v. The Commissioner

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

Josh Vs The District Collector

Savithri Vs The District Collector

D.Sureshbabu Vs The Secretary to Government

Tvl. Sri Annai Agro Foods Vs The Assistant Commissioner (St) -Ii

Anantha Kumar Vs The Commissioner

R.Senthilkumar Vs The Regional Transport Officer