AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P. Sathasivam, J.—The above writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 21.07.2005 made in Writ Petition
No. 8 of 2003, in and by which the learned Judge, after finding that the Panchayat is also claiming right in respect of land in question, the disputed
questions of fact cannot be resolved in a writ proceedings, dismissed the writ petition with a liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent civil
Court to get the matter resolved.
Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant.
Though the appellant claims that the land in question belongs to a Temple and it is temple poramboke, the order of the learned Judge shows that
first of all the petitioner has not furnished the survey number and other details and secondly, no document was produced to substantiate their claim.
On the other hand, the Panchayat has filed a counter contending that the property in question is vested with them and the Panchayat alone has
every right to collect the entry fee or parking fee for the vehicles entering the said area.
In the light of the stand of the Panchayat as well as the temple, as rightly pointed out by the learned Judge, the said issue cannot be decided in the
writ proceedings. It requires evidence in the form of oral and documentary. The learned Judge has rightly dismissed the writ petition with a liberty
to the petitioner to approach the competent civil Court to vindicate their grievance. We concur with the said conclusion and find no ground for
interference. Accordingly, the writ appeal fails and the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected WAMP., is also dismissed.