While observing that the Courts would also have to exercise parens patriae jurisdiction over a Deity, the Madras High Court has ordered that only the name of the deity be recorded in the revenue records.

The High Court was considering a Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking the records relating to the impugned proceedings of the Commissioner of Land Administration and a direction to the respondent authorities to mutate the revenue records as “Nathan-Punjai- Sree Narguna Sundara Vinayagar Balasubramaniar Kovil and issue patta in the name of temple/ deity.

The Single Bench of Justice K. Kumaresh Babu held, “As regards the objections against by the petitioner, it is to be noted that the petitioner had been representing a Deity by name, Sree Narguna Sundara Vinayagar and in this regard, the objection raised by the 5th respondent, as to the maintainability of this Writ Petition, is unable to be sustained, as this Court would also have to exercise parens patriae jurisdiction in respect of a Deity, which is always considered to be a minor.”

“With the aforesaid observations, the Writ Petition stands disposed of with a direction that the name of the deity, namely Sree Narguna Sundara Vinayagar Balasubramaniar alone shall be recorded in the revenue records. Further, the classification that has been made as “Natham Private” is without any such classification being recognised under the Revenue Standing Order”, it ordered.

Advocate V.R. Shanmuganathan represented the Petitioner, while Special Government Pleader S.Siva Thilakar represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The Executive Officer, representing Arulmighu Mutharamman Thirukovil, Palayamkottai Town challenged an order passed by the Commissioner of Land Administration directing that the revenue records should be mutated in the name of one Sree Narguna Sundara Vinayakar Temple represented by its Hereditary Trustee, the fifth respondent, one Shanmuga Sundaram Pillai.

Reasoning

The Bench noted that the petitioner is also under the control and management of the said Sree Narguna Sundara Vinayagar Balasubramaniar Kovil. Considering that the petitioner had been representing a Deity by name, Sree Narguna Sundara Vinayagar, the Bench discarded the objection raised by the Commissioner as to the maintainability of this Writ Petition.

“Further, the objection raised that the impugned order has been issued without there being any executive instructions by the Revenue Department concerned, it is to be noted that in the Hon'ble Apex Court judgment, which is a law of the land where, the name of Deity alone has been directed to be required and that even in the absence of an executive instruction and a law, the said law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court would also have to be equally applied”, it stated.

The Bench thus disposed of the Petition with a direction that the name of the deity, namely Sree Narguna Sundara Vinayagar Balasubramaniar alone should be recorded in the revenue records. “Further, the classification that has been made as “Natham Private” is without any such classification being recognised under the Revenue Standing Order. Hence, the land only classified as natham to be standing the name of the deity, namely, Sree Narguna Sundara Vinayagar Balasubramaniar. There shall be no order as to costs”, it ordered.

Referring to the judgment of the Apex Court wherein it has been held that executive instructions could be issued to supplement the statute and rules framed thereunder, the Bench asked the Secretary, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Fort St.Gorge, Chennai, to issue necessary instructions in that regard apart from a further direction to the respective revenue authorities to carry out necessary corrections in the revenue records.

Cause Title: The Executive Officer v. The Commissioner of Land Administration

Appearance

Petitioner: Advocate V.R. Shanmuganathan

Respondent: Special Government Pleader S. Siva Thilakar, Government Advocate M.S. Parthiban, Advocate S. Kumar

Click here to read/download Order


Madras High CourtJustice K Kumaresh Babu

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.