Mobile View
Main Search Advanced Search Disclaimer
Cites 1 docs
Article 226 in The Constitution Of India 1949
Citedby 1 docs
R.Sylaja vs The Commissioner on 26 November, 2010

User Queries
View the actual judgment from court
Madras High Court
Thiruvaduthurai Adheenam vs State Of Tamilnadu on 15 November, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
                              
                      DATED  : 15/11/2007
                              
                            CORAM
                              
            THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN
                              
                Writ Petition No.8408 of 1999
                              




Sri-la-Sri Sivaprakasa Pandara Sannadhi Avargal Adheenakarthar
Thiruvaduthurai Adheenam
Thiruvaduthurai 
and Hereditary Trustee of:

1.  Thiruvaduthurai Adheenam
    Thiruvaduthurai

2.  Sri Gomuktheeswaraswamy Temple
    Thiruvaduthurai

3.  Sri Vadavaranyaeswaraswamy Temple
    Thiruvalangadu.

4.  Sri Suyambunathaswamy Temple
    Narasinganpettai.

5.  Sri Akshayanathaswamy Temple
    Narasinganpettai.

6.  Viswanatha Swamy Temple
    Karaikantam

7.  Veezhinathaswamy Temple
    Thiruveezhimazhalai

8.  Sri Mahalingaswamy Temple
    Thiruvuvidaimarudur.

9.  Sri Mayuranathaswamy Temple
    Mayiladuthurai.

10. Prananathaswamy Temple
    Thirumangalakudi.

11. Athmanathaswamy Temple
    Thirupperundurai.

12. Akshyanathaswamy Temple
    Thirumandurai.

13. Kalyanasundareswaraswamy Temple
    Nallur.

14. Neelakanteswaraswamy Temple
    Illuppapattu.

15. Banapureeswaraswamy Temple
    Vanapuram.

16. Subramaniaswamy Temple
    Karukkuthurai.

17. Somanathaswamy Temple
    Arumuganeri.

18. Vilappojai Kattalai attached to Manenthiappar Temple
    Kallidaikurichi.

19. Pitchai Kattalai attached to Papanaswamy Temple
    Papanasam.

20. Udhayamarthandam Kattalai 
    attached to Subramaniaswamy Temple
    Valliyur.

21. Senthil Thiruppani Kattalai 
    attached to Subramaniaswamy Temple
    Thiruchendur.

22. Senthil Annathana kattalai 
    attached to Subramaniaswamy Temple
    Tiruchendur.

23. Senthil Visaka Kattalai 
    attached to Subramaniaswamy temple
    thiruchendur.

24. Senthil Arutpani Kattalai 
    attached to Subramaniaswamy Temple
    Thiruchendur.

25. Senthil Pradosha Kattalai 
    attached to Subramaniaswamy Temple
    Tiruchendur.

26. Avudayappa Pillai Kattalai 
    attached to Meenakshisundareswarar Temple
    Madurai.         						..Petitioners.


          Versus

                              
1.  State of Tamilnadu 
    Rep. by Secretary to Govt. 
    Dept. of Revenue
    Fort St.George
    Chennai 9.

2.  The District Collector
    Nagapattinam.

3.  The District Collector
    Tiruvarur.

4.  The District Collector
    Thanjavur

5.  The District Collector
    Tiruchirapalli

6.  The District Collector
    Madurai.

7.  The District Collector
    Karur.

8.  The District Collector
    Erode.

9.  The District Collector
    Tirunelveli.

10. The District Collector
    Pudukkottai

11. The District Collector
    Kanyakumari at Nagercoil.

12. The District Collector
    Ramanathapuram.

13. The District Collector
    Virudhunagar.              					..Respondents.





Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of  India  praying for the issuance of a Writ  of  Mandamus,
forbearing the respondents from in any manner collecting the
arrears land revenue upto fasli 1406 for the lands owned  by
the petitioner.




      For petitioner          :  Mr.T.Sudhan Raj for Mr.K.Chandrasekaran
      For respondents         :  Mr.M.R.Jothimanian, Government Advocate
                              




                            O R D E R

Heard Mr.T.Sudhan Raj, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.M.R.Jothimanian, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

2. It is submitted that the petitioner/Adheenam is holding vast extent of lands and the income derived from the lands is utilised for the purpose of perpetuation and preservation of its saintly order, maintenance of agamas in temples, chanting of scriptures, daily poojas and conducting festivals etc., and for philanthropic purposes. Though no ceiling had been fixed with regard to the extent of agricultural lands that could be owned by the petitioner/Adheenam, several enactments have been made imposing certain restrictions on the use of such lands. Thus, it was mandated that agricultural lands in excess of 20 standard acres were to be leased out to tenants on yearly basis. The laws had also been enacted providing for the protection of the tenants of such lands and for the constitution of revenue Courts to deal with the disputes arising from such tenancy. However, in course of time, the tenants in the petitioner/Adheenam lands had stopped paying the rent and therefore, the activities of the petitioner/Adheenam were adversely affected. In such circumstances, the petitioner/Adheenam has not been in a position to pay the land revenue as claimed by the authorities of the State of Tamil Nadu. Therefore, the petitioner/Adheenam filed the present writ petition to forbear the respondents from in any manner collecting the arrears of the land revenue upto fasli 1406 for the lands owned by the petitioner/Adheenam.

4. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it has been stated that the petitioner/Adheenam has not pursued the remedy of approaching the State Government for the reliefs sought for by the Adheenam, as provided by this Court in W.P.No.1271 of 1985. However, the petitioner/Adheenam had preferred a suit in O.S.No.39 of 1998 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Valangaiman at Kumbakonam, for a direction to restrain the revenue authorities from collecting land revenue from their tenants.

5. A direction had been issued in the said suit by the District Munsif, directing the revenue authorities not to collect the land revenue from their tenants and to collect the land revenue only as per the existing rules. It has also been stated that the petitioner/Adheenam had not allowed the tenants to pay the kist directly to the revenue authorities, even though the tenants were ready to pay the kist amount to the revenue authorities and to adjust it with the rent payable to the petitioner/Adheenam. However, many of the petitioner/Adheenam's tenants have been paying the rents due from them regularly. Therefore, the relief sought for by the petitioner/Adheenam in the present writ petition cannot be countenanced.

6. On considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the petitioner/Adheenam, as well as for the respondents, this Court is of the considered view that the relief sought for by the petitioner/Adheenam cannot be granted as the petitioner/Adheenam has not shown sufficient cause or reason to prevent the revenue authorities from initiating the proceedings as provided under law to recover the land revenue due from the petitioner/Adheenam. The allegation of the petitioner/Adheenam that the tenants, who are in occupation of the lands belonging to the petitioner/Adheenam, are not paying the rents has not been substantiated by sufficient proof. Even otherwise, non payment of the rent by the tenant cannot be a sustainable reason for the petitioner/Adheenam to avoid payment of land revenue due from them to the State Government.

7. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner had relied on a decision of this Court made in Dharmapuram Adheenam, Dharmapuram, by its Adheenakarthar Sri la Sri Shanmuga Desika Gnanasambanda Paramacharya Swamigal Avargal, Dharmapuram, reported in 1973 Writ L.R 875 (W.P.Nos.7330 and 7336 of 1984), to pray that the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation to the State Government for necessary exemption or abatement from payment of the land revenue.

8. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that it is open to the petitioner/Adheenam to submit a representation to the Tamil Nadu State Government, seeking for exemption or abatement relating to levy of land revenue on the petitioner/Adheenam. On such representation being made by the petitioner/Adheenam, it is expected that the authorities concerned would consider and dispose of the same, on merits and in accordance with law, expeditiously.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the above observations. No costs.

csh To

1. The Secretary State of Tamilnadu Dept. of Revenue Fort St.George Chennai 9.

2. The District Collector Nagapattinam.

3. The District Collector Tiruvarur.

4. The District Collector Thanjavur.

5. The District Collector Tiruchirapalli.

6. The District Collector Madurai.

7. The District Collector Karur.

8. The District Collector Erode.

9. The District Collector Tirunelveli.

10. The District Collector Pudukkottai.

11. The District Collector Kanyakumari at Nagercoil.

12. The District Collector Ramanathapuram.

13. The District Collector Virudhunagar.