M ARUMUGAM Vs. P LAKSHMANAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By consent, the writ appeal itself is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) Mr.K.Prabhakar, learned counsel appearing for the appellants would submit that the appellants belong to Nattar Community and their ancestors have been residing in Poovandipatti Village for a quite long time and decision was taken before Nattars and Nagarathars in the year 2001, to sell Temple lands to an extent of about 30 acres at a price not less than Rs.30,000/- per acre and accordingly, the sale was effected. It is the further submission of the learned counsel appearing for the appellants that though some averments have been made in the writ petition against the appellants herein, they have not been arrayed as parties in the said writ petition and the learned single Judge has disposed of the Writ Petition by issuing certain directions and however, misconstruing the same, the Official respondents, without resorting to due process of law, threaten to demolish the superstructure put up by the appellants and dispossess them from the site in question and therefore, they have been constrained to approach this Court by filing the writ appeal, challenging the order dated 102018, made in W.P.(MD).No.14428 of 2010.

(3.) Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 2 to 4, 6 & 7 would submit that the alleged sale in favour of the forefather of the appellants are per se illegal and as such, it can be ignored also and would further add that direction No.1 of paragraph No.20 of the above said order would indicate that the third respondent in the writ petition shall conduct an enquiry under Section 78 of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act and take steps to recover the property which is the subject matter of the writ petition, from the purchasers, after giving opportunity to all the parties concerned and also issued further directions in this regard in Clause Nos.j & k and as such, the apprehension expressed by the appellants is wholly unfounded.