SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(Mad) 620

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. VENUGOPAL
A. Palaniappan
Versus
The Collector, Namakkal District & Others
W.P.No.49994 of 2006 and M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2006
Decided on : 21-02-2008

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:N.G.R. Prasad, M/s. T. Sundaravadanam, Advocate.
For the Respondents:R1 & 2, D. Srinivasan, A.G.P., R3, N. Manoharan, V. Anandhamoorthy, Advocates, R4, T.Chandrasekaran, S.G.P.

Headnote:

Burial Ground - Land Dispute - Rule 4 of the Tamil Nadu Village Panchayats (Provision of Burial and Burning Grounds) Rules, 1999 - The judgment discusses the dispute over the use of a piece of land as a burial ground, involving conflicting claims from the villagers and the temple authorities. The court considered the classification of the land as Temple Poramboke and the alternative sites suggested for use as burial grounds. The judgment also highlights the legal provisions under Rule 4 and Rule 7 of the Tamil Nadu Village Panchayats (Provision of Burial and Burning Grounds) Rules, 1999, and emphasizes the need for compliance with these rules in the allocation of burial grounds.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought permanent allocation of a burial ground on a disputed piece of land. The temple authorities and the villagers were in conflict over the use of the land for burial purposes.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner did not have a legal enforceable right to maintain the writ petition. It suggested that the government could allocate a different Government Poramboke land for use as a burial ground, but not the disputed Temple Poramboke land.

Issues: The main issue was the dispute over the use of the land as a burial ground, with conflicting claims from the villagers and the temple authorities.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for compliance with Rule 4 and Rule 7 of the Tamil Nadu Village Panchayats (Provision of Burial and Burning Grounds) Rules, 1999, in the allocation of burial grounds. It also highlighted the lack of legal enforceable right for the petitioner to maintain the writ petition.

Final Decision: The writ was disposed of without costs, and the government was suggested to allocate a different Government Poramboke land for use as a burial ground, free from any dispute.

Judgment :-

M. Venugopal, J.

The petitioner has filed this writ petition as a resident in the larger interest of the public Nathamedu, praying for the relief of issuance of Writ of Certiorarified

Mandamus calling for the entire records in Na.Ka.No.39318/2006/l3 dated 211. 2006 passed by the first respondent viz., the District Collector, Namakkal District and quash the same and consequently directing the first respondent viz., the Collector, Namakkal District to allot permanently the existing burial ground situated in the Government land comprised in Survey No.112/2 for the Nathamedu Village people for performing their last funeral rites in the burial ground continuously.

2.According to the petitioner, in the Mangalam Village Panchayat there are 16 hamlets one among them is the Nathamedu hamlet wherein there are population of 500 persons residing in the Nathamedu hamlet for more than years together for 3 generations by their forefathers and that Village people living in Nathamedu hamlet was having their free access in the Government land in Survey No.112/2 and they were performing last funeral rites in the said land for these years using the same as burial ground.

.3. It is the further case of the petitioner that this custom practice was disturbed when the

.third respondent, Hereditary Trustee, Arulmigu Karpoora Vinayagar Alagunachiamman Temple, Mangalam Village and Post, Tiruchengode Taluk, Namakkal District constructed a temple in Government land comprising in S.No.112/2 on 20.05.2005 and that the kumbabishekam was performed and before the construction of new temple, the third respondent temple was situated in the opposite side of the existing position in Survey No.123 and when the death of a lady took place in Nathamedu hamlet on 20.09.2005, the third respondent and their men restrained the Nathamedu hamlet Village people for the first time from entering into the said Government Pormboke lands comprised in Survey No.112/2 for carrying out the last funeral rites in the burial ground and among the two groups of people there was a law and order problem in this regard and to settle the problem, a peace meeting on 35. 2005 took place in the presence of the Tahsildar, Tiruchengode and Deputy Superintendent of Police and the two groups agreed to restore the original position that existed before the construction of the temple from 07.07.2005 after the completion of the mandala poojas.

4. On behalf of the petitioner, it is stated that the third respondent along with Police Officials and with the help of second respondent caused serious mental agony and pressure on 20.09.2005 when a death took place in the Nathamedu hamlet and successfully prevented the said Village people from entering into a Government land in Survey No.112/2 for performing their last rites and that the officials of the Government buried the said persons body in the Government land comprising in Survey No.112/2, which cannot be disputed by them at any point of time and in fact, the Panchayat Administration viz., Mangalam Village Panchayat passed a resolution on 010. 2005 seeking the first respondent to permit the Nathamedu hamlet people to continue to do their last funeral rites in the Government land in Survey No.112/2 without any obstacle.

.5. The stand of the writ petitioner is that the third respondent filed a suit for permanent injunction on the file of District Munsif, Tiruchengode in O.S.No.349 of 2005 as if he is the lawful owner of the Government land in Survey No.112/2 against the Nathamedu hamelet Villagers and that the peace meeting dated 30.08.2005 referred to in the order was not at all held on the said day and the Village people never accepted the proposal in regard to the performance of the last funeral rites in the watershed (Odai Poramboke) lines and as a matter of fact, the signatures of four villagers were taken by the Revenue Officials for the purpose of circumventing and setting right the law and order problem pertaining to the death of one






























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top