R.KRITHIGA Vs. COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) R.Krithiga is the wife of the late Rengarajan. According to her, he was cultivating the agricultural punja lands in Survey Nos.781/1, 745, 744/3, 744/4, 744/7 and 559/8 that belong to Arulmigu Venugopal Swamy Thirukoil and Poonjoolai Amman Thirukoil of Shobanapuram, Thuraiyur Taluk as its cultivating tenant. He applied to the Tahsildar, Thuraiyur who is the statutory authority under the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Lands Record of Tenancy Act, 1969 for recording him as a cultivating tenant. By order dated 07.01.2011, he was recorded as a cultivating tenant in respect of the lands under the said temple. The writ petitioner's husband was regularly remitting the rental amounts to the executive officer of the temple till the year 2016. But, for the subsequent years, the executive officer refused to receive the rent in question. Krithiga's husband passed away on 09.05.2018 and she stepped into his shoes and is cultivating the lands in question. The temple wanted the statutory authority under the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Lands Record of Tenancy Act, 1969 to set aside its earlier order dated 07.01.2011. The authority by order dated 15.10.2018 dismissed the petition filed by the temple and confirmed the earlier order made on 07.11.2011.

(2.) At this stage, the executive officer of the temple by communication dated 01.10.2018 informed Mrs.Krithiga that since her husband has passed away, the possession of the lands in question has been restored to the temple. The executive officer has issued the said communication based on the proceedings dated 25.09.2018 issued by the Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Trichy. Mrs.Krithiga filed WP(MD)No.23559 of 2018 questioning the stand of the HR&CE authorities and seeks to restrain them from interfering with her possession of the lands in question. The temple on the other hand challenges the order dated 15.10.2018 passed by the Tahsildar, Thuraiyur refusing to recall his earlier order dated 07.01.2011 recording Thiru.Rengarajan as the cultivating tenant. In the meanwhile, the temple claims to have auctioned the leasehold rights in respect of the lands in favour of a third party by name Elango. The said Elango has also made a rival claim that he had already taken possession of the lands in question and sown maize seeds in the lands. He makes an allegation that Mrs.Krithiga was not actually cultivating the lands in question and that she has leased the said lands in favour of third parties.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel on either side.