(1.) AGGRIEVED by the common order of the learned single Judge dated 31.07.2001, the petitioners in W.P.No.20918 of 1992 preferred Writ Appeal No.2524 of 2001 and the petitioners in W.P.No.5365 of 1991, preferred Writ Appeal No.253 of 2002.
(2.) FOR convenience, we shall refer the parties as arrayed before the learned single Judge.
(3.) ON 20.05.1987 and 29.08.1987, the writ petitioners made representation requesting the Government to sell the plots in their possession. The Government in their letter dated 24.04.1987, instructed the petitioners to contact the Commissioner, H.R. & C.E., Department, if they are willing to purchase the plots at the rate of Rs.1.25 lakhs per ground. In the meanwhile, the Trustees of the temple objected to the price fixed at the rate of Rs.1.25 lakhs per ground. Thereafter, the guideline value was obtained from the Sub-Registrar, Mylapore, Chennai in letter dated 23.03.1992 wherein the value of the land is stated to be Rs.265/- per sq.ft. at Alarmelumanga Agraharam and Rs.240.70 per sq.ft. at Venkatesa Agraharam. In view of the increased market value of the land, the first respondent asked the petitioners to give their consent to purchase the land at the prevailing market rate at Rs.265 and 240.70 per sq.ft. along with 30% solatium, by proceedings dated 10.11.1992. As against the said communication, the petitioners have filed the writ petition. Since the value of the land has gone up several times than the originally fixed value, viz., Rs.1.25 lakhs per ground during the interregnum period, in the interest of religious institution, the trustees of the temple objected to the value fixed, viz., Rs.1.25 lakhs per ground and according to them, the land would fetch a price of more than Rs.10 lakhs per ground. It is for the authorities to decide whether the sale is beneficial to the religious institution and order for disposal of the immovable property under Section 34 of the Act. No order has so far been passed under Section 34 of the Act in favour of the writ petitioners. The petitioners have got alternative remedy under Section 114 of the Act and hence, the writ petition is not maintainable.