K. Perumal vs The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department and Others

R. Sudhakar, J.—This writ appeal has been directed against the order of the learned Single Judge made in W.P. (MD)No. 19699 of 2013, dated 05.12.2013, dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant seeking to quash the auction notice issued by the 5th respondent in respect of the property in S. No. 856, to an extent of 1 acre 52 cents, in R. Pudukkottai Village and also for a consequential direction to the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said property by the appellant.

The case of the petitioner, though not properly pleaded before the learned Single Judge, is that he is the owner of the land, to an extent of 1 acre 52 cents in Survey No. 856 of R. Pudukottai Village, based on a sale deed, dated 09.10.1986, which has been annexed as a document in the typed set of papers. The appellant challenged the proceeding of the 5th respondent, namely, Thakkar of Arulmighu Periyakulam Karuppasamy cum Kannimar Temple, to bring the property in question in public auction, stating that he is the lawful owner and the 5th respondent has no authority to bring the said property for auction. The learned Single Judge, however, dismissed the writ petition finding that the property in question originally belonged to Periyakulam Kannimarkoil Tharkala Poosanikai and the trustees of the temple have executed an affidavit to the effect that they were not able to perform poojas and temple works and therefore they relinquish their right of Trusteeship over the temple and therefore the 5th respondent has been appointed as Thakkar of the Temple by the 1st respondent vide his proceedings, dated 27.02.2013 and thereafter the 5th respondent has taken charge as the Thakkar of the Temple.

In such view of the matter, it is a dispute between the petitioner and the temple authorities as to the right, title and entitlement over the property in question and that cannot be the subject matter of dispute in the present writ proceedings, which is one of challenge to the auction. The learned Single Judge has further held that the appellant/writ petitioner has not challenged the appointment of the Thakkar to the temple, which admittedly the appellant has not done. In any event, if the appellant claims that he is the owner of the property in question, by virtue of a sale deed, it is for him to approach the competent forum for redressal of his grievance, by establishing his right and he cannot establish his claim over the property, as a matter of right, based on certain documents in any other proceedings, more particularly in the nature of auction notice, issued by the Thakkar. We find no reason to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed. No costs. Connected M.P. (MD) No. 1 of 2014 is also dismissed.