K. Asok Kumar Ram vs The Secretary to Government, Revenue Department and Others

Chitra Venkataraman, J.—This is a Public Interest Litigation where the petitioner has sought for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to take over and construct the Kadavoor Taluk Office at Thargampatty in Survey No. 454/1 for an extent of 2.19.0 hectares in Keelapaguthi Village of Kadavoor Taluk, Karur District. The petitioner contends that the said land belongs to one Mylampatty Bhagavathi Amman Temple. The Trustee of the temple- R. Kulandaivel has filed an affidavit before this Court expressing no objection to construct the Taluk Office in Survey No. 454/1, which according to the deponent belongs to the temple. It is stated in the affidavit that the deponent was appointed as Trustee by the community people and there is no objection to construct the building.

We have no material to accept the above affidavit given by the Trustee of a temple, as under what authority he had given a ''No Objection Certificate'' to construct the Taluk Office. Leaving that aside, a reading of the counter affidavit filed by the sixth respondent shows that the said land seems to be a disputed land and one Syed Mohammed Rowther, son of Naina Mohammed Rowther and one Abdul Azeez, son of Abdul Rowther, presented a petition as early as 01.11.2010 before the third respondent claiming right over the property comprised in S.F. No. 454/1 to an extent of 2.19.0 hectares as their forefathers had purchased the same from the Poojaries of the said Bhagavathi Amman Temple.

Considering the dispute thus raised, it was decided to select alternative sites and accordingly in paragraph-7 of the counter, it is stated that a Government poramboke land measuring to an extent of 0.84 cents out of 1.22 acre in S.F. No. 386/1 in Keelapaguthi Village, which is called as Kovil Kinaru has been selected for construction of Taluk Office as suitable for construction of Taluk Office with all amenities. Considering the above, we do not find any justifiable ground to grant the relief of mandamus as prayed for by the petitioner in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.