Writ of mandamus cannot be issued to compel Devasthanam to alienate or direct Commissioner Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments or State Government to accord approval for sale of property of religious institution, unless mandatory requirement under Section 34 satisfied.

P. Sathasivam, J.

Aggrieved by the common order of the learned single Judge dated 31.07.2001, the petitioners in W.P.No.20918 of 1992 preferred Writ Appeal No.2524 of 2001 and the petitioners in W.P.No.5365 of 1991, preferred Writ Appeal No.253 of 2002.

2. For convenience, we shall refer the parties as arrayed before the learned single Judge.

3. The case of the petitioners in W.P.No.20918 of 1992 is as follows:

(a) The petitioners are lessees of plots of land belonging to the second respondent temple, Sri Vedantha Desikar Devasthanam, Mylapore, Chennai and they are enjoying the same by putting pucca terraced houses, for more than 60 years. Though their lease period expired and had to be extended in 1985, extension could not be granted in view of the first respondents [The Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment (H.R.& C.E.) Department] Memo dated 22.05.1985, rejecting the proposal for extension of lease, but simultaneously declaring that such plots could be sold if the lessees agreed to purchase the plots. After correspondence, the same position was reiterated by the Deputy Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, H.R. & C.E. Department, by letter dated 24.04.1987 adding that the price would be at the rate of Rs.1.25 lakhs per ground. The petitioners gave their acceptance to buy the plots at this rate by their letter dated 22.01.1988. Though the second respondent expressed willingness to sell the plots to the petitioners for the said price in their letter dated 14.04.1988, and forwarded necessary proforma in respect of the plots, as prescribed under Section 34 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 (in short, the Act) to the first respondent, there was no response at all from the office of the first respondent. Several reminders were sent to the first respondent, but in vain.

.(b) On 26.06.1991, the first respondent passed an order according sanction for sale of plots to the petitioners at the same agreed rate of Rs.1.25 lakhs per ground, however, to be paid with interest from 1987 and requiring acceptance from the petitioners. The acceptance of the petitioners were communicated to the first respondent by their letter dated 27.06.1991. Even after receipt of such acceptance, the respondents kept quiet for more than a year, and by order dated 11. 1992, fixed the price of the plots at the exorbitant rate of Rs.340.70 per sq.ft., that is, Rs.5 lakhs per ground, without reference to any of the earlier proceedings. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed W.P.No.20918 of 1992 to quash the said order and for direction to the respondents to act in pursuance and fulfillment of the first respondents order No.94945/90/R-2 dated 20.06.1991.

.4. The first respondent, the Commissioner, H.R.&C.E. Department filed a counter affidavit, wherein it is stated that the administration of Arulmighu Vedantha Desikar Temple, Mylapore, Chennai is governed by a scheme framed by the High Court, Madras in C.S.No.253 of 1907. The temple owns about 80 grounds of lands in Alarmelumanga Agraharam and about 32 grounds in Venkatesa Agraharam in Mylapore, Chennai. In Application No.172 of 1932 in C.S.No.253 of 1907, the High Court, Madras, permitted the trustees of the temple to lease out the plots owned by the temple for a period of 50 years. The period of lease expired on 07.05.1982. On 28.04.1975, the temple authorities had submitted an application under Section 34 of the Act seeking permission to sell certain plots to the lessees, who are in possession of the same. The land value was fixed at Rs.8,000/-per ground. Subsequently, the rate was enhanced to Rs.75,000/- per ground. In 1985, when the temple authorities proposed to sell the plots to certain occupants, the District Collector, Madras was asked to furnish the market value of the land and the Collector, in his letter dated 19.08.1985 reported the value of land at Rs.1.25 lakhs per ground. Accepting the value of land as reported by the Col