SOZHIA MARUTHUVA MANDAGAPADI KATTALAI TRUST Vs. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEVELOPMENT ENDOWMENT AND INFORMATION DEPARTMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a Hindu Charitable Endowment Trust, governed by the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"). On an application made by some interested persons, the Deputy Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, in O.A.Nos.5/1987 and 25/1989, has framed a Scheme. In terms of the Scheme, the affairs of the Trust and properties are managed by the Trustees.

(2.) The above said Trust owns 1.21 acres of land comprised in Survey No.43 in Dindigul Town. There is a building on the said land and the income derived from the building is utilised for achieving the objects of the Trust. The building is now in a highly dilapidated condition and it has become not usable. Therefore, according to the petitioner, a decision was taken in the Board Meeting to sell the property for the benefit of the institution, as the same is also absolutely necessary. For so selling the property, the petitioner made an application under Section 34(1) of the Act seeking sanction from the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department. But the Commissioner, by order in Na.Ka.No.76943/2010 dated 12.02.2011, rejected the said request and declined to give sanction to sell the said property. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner filed a revision to the Government under Section 114 of the Act. Having considered the same, the Government, by order in G.O.Ms.No.297, Tamil Development, Charitable Endowments and Information Department, dated 31.08.2012, confirmed the order of the Commissioner, and thereby declined to grant sanction to sell the property. The petitioner is aggrieved by the same. Therefore, the petitioner has come up with this writ petition seeking to set aside the said order and for a further direction to the Commissioner to grant sanction to sell the said property.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents and also perused the records carefully.