COMMON ORDER

These Writ Petitions have been filed seeking for a direction to the 1st respondent to accept the documents filed by the petitioners for registration in respect of the subject property and register the same within the time stipulated by this Court.

2. The facts of these Writ Petitions are that the subject land originally belongs to Arulmigu Sankaranarayanasamy Temple. The said lands were given as service Maniam to poojamurai Bhattars and the pattas were granted in their name under the Act 30 of 1963. The Poojamurai Bhattars sold the said lands to “N.G.G.Os and other public servants Co-operatives Building Society Limited” (hereinafter referred to as “the said Society”), without getting prior sanction from the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department as required under Section 34 of the Act. Challenging the same, the temple authorities filed a suit in O.S.No.181 or 1975 before the District Munsif Court, Sankarankovil and the same was decreed in favour of the temple. Against which, the society and bhattars had filed an appeal in A.S.No.23 of 1977 before the Subordinate Court, Tenkasi. Pending the appeal, the society and bhattars had arrived at a compromise. Therefore, a proposal has been forwarded to the Commissioner for compromising the issue and the Commissioner, HR & CE Department, vide proceedings dated 22.02.1982, permitted the temple to compromise the issue on condition that the sale consideration should be deposited to the temple. Accordingly, the poojamurai bhattars had executed a registered release deed dated 03.04.1982 in favour of the said Society. The said Society converted the subject land into house plots and thereafter, various sale transactions have been taken place. When the same was presented for registration, the 1st respondent informed the petitioners that the 2nd respondent has raised objection and directed the petitioners to get No Objection Certificate from the 2nd respondent. Hence, the petitioners have filed these Writ Petitions.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that this Court has allowed the similar Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.19077 of 2022, by an order dated 22.08.2022, and the petitioners are also placed in a similar situation. Therefore, they are entitled to the same relief.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent would that the Commissioner, HR & CE Department has granted permission to compromise the issue on a condition that the Executive Officer of the Devasthanam should get a sanction for sale of the property by submitting an appropriate application under Section 34 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. Though there is a condition imposed by the Commissioner that the Executive Officer should get sanction, no such sanction has been obtained. Therefore, the sale is not valid under Section 34 of the HR & CE Act. Hence, he opposed these Writ Petitions.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent and perused the materials available on record.

6. On a perusal of the HR & CE Act, it is seen that Section 34 of the HR & CE Act mandates the sanction for sale of any property and the sanction shall be given by the Commissioner with the previous approval of the Government. Admittedly, in this case, the properties have been dealt with long back in the year 1975, which was the subject matter of the suit filed by the 2nd respondent temple in O.S.No.181 of 1975. On an appeal in A.S.No.23 of 1977, realizing the fact that as the property has been sold and developed as house site, it is not feasible to retrieve the property, the Commissioner has granted permission to enter into a compromise, on the conditions that the amount should be deposited to the temple and the Executive Officer of the Devasthanam should get a sanction for sale of the property by s