R.VELLAICHAMY Vs. VAIRAVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The validity of the order dtd. 21/12/2017 made in W.P.(MD) No. 1734 of 2017 by a learned Single Judge of this Court is put to challenge in this appeal by the third parties.

(2.) Originally, the facts leading to the filing of the writ petition in W.P.No.1734 of 2017 are as follow :

(3.) A counter-affidavit had been filed by the Assistant Commissioner before the writ court denying the tenancy of the first respondent herein/petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner was the permissive occupant by one of the erstwhile trustees, without the knowledge of the other trustees, which was admitted by him, and such permission was never authorised by the HR and CE Department and hence, the petitioner is only an encroacher and following due process of law, eviction process was initiated. It was submitted that the temple administration was attempting to provide better basic amenities to the devotees, however, the encroachment made by the petitioner and other similarly placed persons caused hindrance in construction of such new facilities.