LAWS(MAD)-2022-6-240

DISTRICT COLLECTOR COLLECTORATE, KANCHEEPURAM Vs. S.GUHAN

Decided On June 13, 2022
District Collector Collectorate, Kancheepuram Appellant
V/S
S.Guhan Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The batch of writ appeals has been preferred to challenge the order dtd. 4/11/2020, passed in two batches of writ petitions concerning two temples, namely, Sri Sakthi Muthamman Temple, Neelankarai and Arulmighu Kottaimariamman Thirukoil, Omalur, Salem District. A challenge was made to (i) the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.2871, Revenue Department, dtd. 27/9/1963 (for brevity, "G.O. dtd. 27/9/1963"), assigning the land of temple poramboke to the Fisheries Department; and (ii) the order dtd. 28/3/2018 of the District Collector, Salem, transferring temple poramboke land in favour of the Regional Transport Officer, Salem. The writ petitions were allowed holding assignment of the land by G.O. dtd. 27/9/1963 and order dtd. 28/3/2018 to be illegal.

(2.) Brief facts of the case leading to the filing of the writ appeals are as follows: Sri Sakthi Muthamman temple is located in Survey No.82/1 of Neelankarai Village, Sholinganallur Taluk, measuring an extent of 2.03 acres. The said temple is being managed by a Temple Management Committee constituted by the residents of Chinna Neelankarai village and classified as "temple poramboke", as indicated in the 1951 'A' Register Extract and FMB sketch. The vacant land around the temple was used by the villagers of Chinna Neelankarai for conducting temple festivals and providing temporary shelters to the village fishermen during natural calamities. That being the case, vide G.O. dtd. 27/9/1963, land measuring to the extent of 2.03 acres in Survey No.82/1 was assigned and transferred to the Fisheries Department for construction of a building for installation of an Ice plant-cum-cold storage.

(3.) The challenge to the G.O. dtd. 27/9/1963, was made by maintaining the writ petitions of the year 2013, alleging that in the year 2013, the Fisheries Department has come to make a survey of the boundary. Prior to the aforesaid, the petitioners/non-appellants were not aware about the assignment of the land to the Fisheries Department by G.O. dtd. 27/9/1963. It is for the reason that the Government Order was not published in the Gazette so as to be within the knowledge of the public and otherwise, the land was not as such used by the Fisheries Department.