Revenue Authorities cannot adjudicate title disputes, requiring resolution in civil court; decisions must include sufficient reasoning to uphold property rights.

ORDER :

N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.

This writ petition has been filed challenging the proceedings of the first respondent dated 23.5.2023 and for a consequential direction to respondents 1 and 2 to restore patta Nos.712, 3158 & 1566 in the names of the petitioners.

2. Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1, 2 & 4 the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the third respondent temple.

3. The case of the petitioners is as follows :

(i) The properties in survey Nos.56, 57/1, 57/2A & 70/1 situated at Thiruneermalai originally stood in the name of individual owners for more than 50 years. The respective title holders were in uninterrupted possession and enjoyment of the subject properties. That apart, pattas were also issued in the names of private individuals.

(ii) The first petitioner, which is a property developer, wanted to develop the subject properties into residential apartments in the name and style of Jains Alphine Meadows. Before commencing the development, the first petitioner also sent a communication to the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department and the trustee of the third respondent temple during 2009 about the residential development proposed to have been carried out at about 16 acres of land, which included survey Nos.56, 57 and 70. Apart from that, the first petitioner sought for lease of 20 cents of land in survey No.90 from the third respondent temple and in turn, the first petitioner also donated a sum of Rs.50 lakhs to the third respondent for this purpose.

(iii) Totally, 952 units were planned to have been constructed and out of the same, 400 units were completed during the year 2011 – 2012 and they were handed over to the purchasers. The said construction was made after getting proper planning permission from the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority and the building licence from the Thiruneermalai Town Panchayat. Further, the completion certificate was also obtained on 14.2.2014.

(iv) All of a sudden, the third respondent temple started making a claim over the subject properties and an order dated 24.3.2020 came to be passed by the second respondent whereby the pattas that were granted in favour of the private individuals pertaining to the subject properties were canceled and a direction was given to restore the original entries in the revenue records in favour of the third respondent temple.

(v) Aggrieved by the order dated 24.3.2020 passed by the second respondent, an appeal was filed by the petitioners before the first respondent, who, through the impugned proceedings dated 23.5.2023, came to the conclusion that both the sides are claiming title over the subject properties and that therefore, they can agitate their rights only before the competent civil court and establish the same. However, after having rendered such a finding, the first respondent did not interfere with the order passed by the second respondent. Challenging the same, the petitioners have come forward with this writ petition.

4. The Special Government Pleader appearing for the third respondent took the following stand by filing a typed set of papers:

(i) The subject properties along with a large extent of land measuring 755 acres were gifted to the third respondent temple in the 7^th Century. Thereafter, as per the Survey and Settlement Register prepared in the year 1876, it was recorded that the said lands belonged to the third respondent temple. Even in the records that were maintained with the Reven