N. Paul Vasanthakumar, J.

This writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge made in W.P.No.15527 of 2000 dated 33. 2004 allowing the writ petition filed by the writ petitioners/respondents 1 to 5 herein. Respondents 3 and 4 in the writ petition are appellants herein.

2. Parties herein will be described as arrayed in the writ petition.

3. The brief facts necessary for disposal of the writ appeal are as follows.

.(a) The first petitioner Society is a registered Housing Society representing the residents of Jagadambigai Nagar, Sakthi Nagar and Thiruvalleeswarar Colony. The respondents 3 and 4 are the Executive Officer and Hereditary Trustees of Arulmigu Thiruvalleeswarar Thirukoil, an ancient temple at Padi in Madras. The temple owns considerable extent of lands comprised in S.No.271, 303/1 to 4, 364/1 to 3 near the temple.

.(b) The trustees of the temple in the year 1968 decided to give the lands on lease to the individuals, who were desirous of constructing superstructure on the said lands at their own costs. Several leaseholders constructed superstructures and some of them sold superstructures to the third parties, giving up their leasehold right in the house sites. Thus, there are original allotees and subsequent purchasers of superstructures for whom the first petitioner Society represents.

.(c) The first petitioner Society requested the respondents to sell the house sites to the individuals, who are occupying the said house sites. The second respondent decided to sell the lands to the occupants by proceedings Na.Ka.No.11/76 R2, dated 12. 1984 followed with Government Order dated 12. 1984. Objections were invited and enquiry was conducted as per section 34 of the HR&CE Act, 1959. There was no objection and therefore the respondents decided to sell the house sites to the occupants. The said order dated 12. 1984 was challenged by some of the individuals interested in the welfare of the temple in W.P.No.286 of 1986 before this Court and during the pendency of the writ petition some of the occupants obtained sale deed in their favour and from 110. 1987 respondents stopped allotment of house sites through sale.

.(d) This Court by order dated 11. 1994 set aside the order of the second respondent dated 12. 1984 and remitted the matter back to the Commissioner, HR&CE for fresh disposal by following the provisions of the Act and Rules. The Commissioner was directed to issue notice to the interested parties and pass final orders before passing order under section 34 of the HR&CE Act. The second respondent till date has not passed any order and also not taken any steps to consider the matter afresh and therefore the first petitioner was taking effective steps to make the second respondent to conduct enquiry by submitting various representations from 28. 1997 to 6. 2000.

.(e) No action having been taken by the second respondent in respect of the said representations, petitioners have filed the writ petition for issuing a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to hold enquiry under section 34 of the HR&CE Act, 1959, as directed by this Court and consequently sell the house sites at the same rate fixed in 1984 to 135 members of the Society, whose names are given in the typed set of papers and who are owning the superstructure and occupying and living in the said temple lands.

.(f) The contentions raised in the writ petition are that the hereditary trustee in his letter dated 3. 1998 addressed to the Commissioner, recommended transfer of house sites to the occupants. Similarly, the Deputy Registrar Housing, by letter dated 23. 1998 addressed to the Commissioner, requested to pass orders for transfer of the house sites to the occupants. Society submitted report on behalf of 135 member, but no action was taken by the respondents even though about 66 persons were already given sale deeds in their favour and the other members are discriminated by not extending the same benefit to them.

4.