Yesodha Vs the Commissioner

PRAYER:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for an issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for records pertaining to TSLR extract dated 18.12.2014 issued in favour of the 5^th respondent, to quash the same and to consequently restore the name of the petitioner in the TSLR for the property admeasuring 3600 Sq.ft situated in old Survey No.5/1, T.S. No.39, Block No.11, Kodambakkam village, Chennai.

¶20

For Petitioner(s): Mr.R.Sanjay For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Ravichandran Additional Government Pleader (HR & CE) For R1 & R5 Mr.C.Gowthamaraj Government Advocate For R2 to R4

¶21

ORDER

¶22

This writ petition has been filed challenging the cancellation of TSLR stood in the name of the petitioner vide order 18.12.2014.

¶23

2.Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in the present case the subject property was purchased by the petitioner from one Rathinavelu Thambirar vide sale deed dated 04.07.1970 and thereafter, the revenue records were mutated in the name of the petitioner. The said Rathinavelu Thambirar purchased the subject property from the 5^th respondent/Temple and the 5^th respondent sold the subject property after obtaining permission from the

¶24

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

¶25

WP No. 36309 of 2024

¶26

Commissioner under Section 34 of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. While so, the 4^th respondent/Tahsildar has cancelled the patta stood in the name of the petitioner and mutated the TSLR extract in the

¶27

name of the 5^th respondent Temple on 18.12.2014, without conducting any enquiry. Further, the 4^th respondent has no authority to cancel the patta and only the Revenue Division Officer has power to cancel the patta. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶28

3.Learned Additional Government Pleader (HR & CE) appearing for the respondents 1 and 5 would submit that the subject property was sold without following the proper procedure and therefore, the patta was rightly cancelled and TSLR extract was mutated in the name of the 5^th respondent.

¶29

4.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Additional Government Pleader (HR & CE) appearing for the respondents 1 & 5 and learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 2 to 4.

¶30

5.Upon hearing the above submissions and upon perusal of records, this Court is of the view that the first issue to be decided in the present case is that whether the 4^th respondent/Tahsildar has power to cancel the patta. Ultimately, the Tahsildar has no power to cancel the patta only the Revenue Division Officer has power to cancel the patta.

¶31

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

¶32

WP No. 36309 of 2024

¶33

itself the 5

¶34

6.The second issue is that according to the petitioner in the year 1970

¶35

itself the 5^th respondent sold the subject property after obtaining permission from the Commissioner under Section 34 of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. However, according to the 5^th respondent the subject property was sold in the year 1970 without following proper procedure. Even assuming that the 5^th respondent has right over the subject property and the property was sold without following the due procedure, the 5^th respondent ought to established their right by filing a civil suit. Since the property was sold by executing a sale deed, now the 5^th respondent cannot raise the issue that it was sold without following due procedure and the 4^th respondent has cancelled the patta stood in the name of the petitioner without any Power. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned order is not sustainable and it is liable to be quashed.

¶36

7.Accordingly, the impugned order dated 18.12.2014 is hearby quashed. It is up to the 5^th respondent to establish their title in the manner known to the law. Since the mutation of TSLR extract dated 18.12.2014 is quashed, automatically, the original patta which stood in the name of the petitioner is enforced.

¶37

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

¶38

WP No. 36309 of 2024

¶39

8.In the result, this writ petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently,

¶40

connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶41

22-04-2026

¶42

rst