Eviction orders without the due process under the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act violate principles of natural justice.

COMMON ORDER

Heard both sides.

2.The writ petitioners are small time shopkeepers. They have been permitted by the respondent / temple management to run their petty business in the spaces belonging to the temple. Vide notices dated 25.08.2025, the Executive Officer of the temple had called upon the writ petitioners to vacate and surrender vacant possession within a period of fifteen days. The learned counsel for the temple submitted that the prime reason for calling upon the writ petitioners herein to vacate is that the architectural and aesthetic duty of the mantapam is being marred. The said notices have been put to challenge in these writ petitions.

3.Encroachers of temple properties can be evicted under the provisions set out in Chapter VII of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. Sections 78 and 80 are particularly relevant. In either case, application has to be moved before the jurisdictional Joint Commissioner who alone can pass the eviction order. The Executive Officer of the temple does not have the jurisdiction to pass an enforceable order calling upon the occupants to hand over possession.

On this sole ground, the impugned orders are quashed.

4.It is seen that the impugned communications are more a knee- jerk reaction to the institution of W.P.(MD)No.23177 of 2025 filed by one K.Balasubrahmaniyam. The prayer in the writ petition was to declare Sree Nellaiyappar Temple as a monument of national importance under Section 4 of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. In fact, the said Balasubrahmaniyam wanted Nellaiyappar Temple to be taken over.

5.The writ petition was listed for admission on 25.08.2025. A complaint was made that shops have been allowed to run inside the temple premises. The Hon'ble Division Bench took a serious view and suo motu impleaded the Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments, Palayamkottai and directed him to appear in person on the very next day at 10.30 am and offer his explanation. It is in this background, on the evening of 25.08.2025, the impugned notices came to be issued. Taking note of this development, the writ petition was disposed of in the following terms:-

“11.Since the Joint Commissioner of HR & CE Department has already initiated action under Sections 77, 80 and under other relevant provisions to evict the occupants inside the temple premises and mandapam, no further adjudication is required. However, the authorities competent of HR & CE Department are directed to evict all the occupants from the temple premises and initiate all appropriate steps to protect the monuments, architectures and ancient carvings etc., in accordance with the provisions of the Act and Rules. The entire exercise is directed to be completed by affording opportunity to the occupants, within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”

6.The writ petitioners lament that they were not made parties to the aforesaid writ petition and that an adverse order was obtained behind their back. They point out that while Section 77(1) of the Act forbids lease or granting license for the occupation of any space within or outside the prakarams, mantapams, Courtyards or corridors of the religious institution, there is a proviso which may come to the rescue of the writ petitioners. The proviso reads as under:-

“Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall apply to the leasing or licensing or any such land or space for the purpose of providing amenities to pilgrims or of vending flowers or other articles used for worship ...”

7.The grievance of the writ pe