BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER, HR&CE ADMN. DEPARTMENT,CHENNAI-34.
ew
Tuesday the 14th day of May, Two thousand and thirteen.
Present : Thiru P. Dhanapal, M.A.,B.L.,
Commissioner.
R.P. 53/2013 D2
Between.
L. Srinivasan S/o Lakshmi Narayana Iyengar.
Vi
Petitioner
And
The Executive Officer,
Arulmighu Lakshmi Narayanaswamy Temple,
Konnapuram village, Tharapuram Taluk.
To
Respondent
In the matter of Arulmighu Lakshmi Narayanaswamy Temple,
Konnapuram village, Tharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District.
Revision petition filed under Section 21 of the Tamil Nadu H.R.&
C.E. Act, 1959 (Tamil Nadu Act 22 of 1959) against the notice dated
4.2.2013 of the Executive Officer of the above temple regarding public
ly
auction of temple land.
Order in D.Dis. R.P. 53/2013 (D2) dated :
14.5.2013.
On
The above Revision Petition having come on for final hearing before
me on 30.04.2013 in the presence of Thiru N. Sathyamoorthi, Counsel for
the Petitioner
Upon hearing the arguments and after perusing the
connected records, and the matter having stood over for consideration till
this day, the following order is made:-
2
ORDER
ew
The above revision petition filed under Section 21 of the Act against
the notice dated 4.2.2013 of the Executive Officer of the above temple
regarding public auction of the temple land.
2.
The petitioner contended that punja lands situated at
Varapalayam village admeasuring 21.08 acres was assigned by the temple
to Krishnasamy Iyengar grandfather of Petitioner’s wife for performing
The land was under cultivation of
Vi
pooja about 80 years back.
Krishnasamy Iyengar till his life time.
After his life time, his son
Sundararajan Iyengar had performed the Pooja and cultivated the land till
his life time.
He has no male issue. The petitioner’s wife is the daughter
of the said Sundararaja Iyengar. After his life time, the petitioner has been
doing the pooja service.
The Respondent has made arrangements to
To
auction the land for Fasli 1422 to 1424. Hence, the petitioner filed O.S.
288/2012 before the Sub-Court, Tharapuram and the same is pending.
But the respondent conducted public auction on 18.2.2013.
But the
successful bidder has not taken the possession of the land in question.
3. I heard Thiru N. Sathyamoorthi, Counsel for the petitioner and
respondent/Executive Officer.
In the counter, the Executive Officer has
stated that after the demise of Sundararaja Iyengar no one has performed
ly
pooja in the temple regularly
Since the petitioner was irregular in
performing poojas, he was replaced by another Archakar.
Commissioner granted permission in L.Dis. 68042/2012
Further, the
H4 dated
On
27.1.2013 to lease out the property in public auction. The property was
handed over to the lessees for a consolidated lease amount of Rs. 34,000/for one fasli year.
It is admitted by the petitioner himself that the suit property stands
in the name of the temple. The petitioner was not performing pooja service
in the temple. In view of the Amended Act 2/1971, he cannot claim such
right.
Further, the Public Auction conducted on 18.2.2013 has been
approved by the Commissioner in L.Dis. 18846/2013 H4 dated 19.4.2013.
3
The suit property has been given possession to the lessees after executing
ew
lease agreement.
Hence, nothing survives in the Revision Petition and liable to be
dismissed as infructuous, accordingly the Revision Petition is dismissed as
infructuous
/ typed to dictation/
Vi
/ true copy/ by order/
Sd. P. Dhanapal,
Commissioner.
Superintendent.
On
ly
To
To
1. The Petitioner through Thiru N. Sathyamoorthi, Advocate, No.62, Law
Chambers, High Court Buildings, Chennai.104.
2. The Executive Officer, Arulmighu Lakshmi Narayanaswamy Temple,
Konnapuram village, Tharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District.
Copy to
3. The Joint Commissioner, HR & CE Admn.Dept., Coimbatore.
4. The Assistant Commissioner, HR & C.E. Admn.Department, Tiruppur.
5. The Inspector, HR & CE Admn.Dept., Tharapuram, Tiruppur District.
6. Extra.