JUDGMENT :

(PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 2nd respondent vide R.C.No.45584/2016/V-2 dated 30.03.2017 and quash the same and issue directions to the 1st respondent to consider the request of the petitioner to grant lease by conducting an enquiry and pass orders in accordance with law relating to grant of lease for the property of an extent of 22 cents out of 31 cents comprised in Survey No.96/1, Thiruvidhanthai Village, Thirupporur Taluk, Kanchipuram District.)

1. The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 2nd respondent vide R.C.No.45584/2016/V-2 dated 30.03.2017 and quash the same and issue directions to the 1st respondent to consider the request of the petitioner to grant lease by conducting an enquiry and pass orders in accordance with law relating to grant of lease for the property of an extent of 22 cents out of 31 cents comprised in Survey No.96/1, Thiruvidhanthai Village, Thirupporur Taluk, Kanchipuram District.

2. The petitioner claims that it is owning lands in S.No.136/1B Part and 136/2, Thiruvidanthai Village, Thirupporur Taluk, Kanchipuram District. The lands in S.No.136/2 was originally purchased by the petitioner company from one Eswaramoorthy Nadar in the year 1992 to the extent of 19.50 Acres vide Document No.887/1992 dated 07.05.1992 and Document No.888/1992 dated 07.05.1992. The petitioner further purchased another piece of land in S.No.136/1B Part to an extent of 1.50 Acres from third parties. These lands are adjacent and next to the lands of Sri Nithya Kalyana Perumal Temple, ie., the third respondent temple to the extent of 0.31 Cents, which is in S.No.96/1. Since the temple land at S.No.96/1 falls between the petitioner's land and the East Coast Road (ECR) and since the petitioner has developed the said land of the petitioner as a gated community, in order to have direct access towards the ECR from the property of the petitioner, this adjacent temple land at S.No.96/1 was required. Therefore, in this regard the petitioner had approached the respondents ie., the temple as well as the HR & CE Department, where, pursuant to a recommendatory communication received in this regard by the HR & CE Department from the Joint Commissioner to the Special Commissioner, HR & CE Department, by proceedings dated 19.01.2007, the first respondent Commissioner had permitted to give the 22 cents out of 31 cents of the land belonging to the temple on lease to the petitioner by issuance of a Government Order in G.O.(D) No.177 dated 08.06.2007.

3. Thereafter, when the petitioner approached for renewal of the said lease, since there had been some issue, the petitioner approached this Court by filing a writ petition in W.P.No.16245 of 2016, where an order was passed by this Court on 28.04.2016, directing the respondents therein to consider the request of the petitioner by affording an opportunity of being heard. Thereafter, the Commissioner, HR & CE Department passed an order on 21.06.2016 for giving extension of lease by fixing a monthly rent of Rs.5000/-.

4. Further, the petitioner had also filed another writ petition in W.P.Nos.38348 and 38349 of 2016, where the petitioner sought for grant of lease or extension of lease to the petitioner by taking into account the earlier Government Order in G.O.(D) No.177 dated 08.06.2007. Those writ petitions were disposed of by a learned Judge of this Court by an order dated 04.11.2016 dismissing the writ petitions filed by the petitioner. As against which, the petitioner preferred writ appeals in W.A.Nos.6 and 7 of 2017, where a Division Bench of this Court, passed the following interim order on 24.01.2017.

“3. Accordingly, preserving liberty to the appellant to approach the Commissioner, HR&CE, as expeditiously as possible, offering a minimum donation of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) for securing r