Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(1) Challenge in the writ petition is to the communication of the Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board [in short ''TNSCB''] dated 02.11.2015 in and by which the Board informed the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments [in short ''HR&CE] and the Executive Officers of various temples that a compensation has been fixed for the lands belonging to the temples which have been declared as a slum area and requiring the Commissioner to receive the said sum.

(2) The petitioner is the Executive Officer of Arulmighu Semathamman and Anantheeswarar Temple situate in Perambur. This temple owned vast extent of lands in S.Nos.835/1, 835/2, 836/1, 836/5 on the junction of Thulasinga Mudali Street and Kandapillai Street in Perambur Revenue Village.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis (3) A Notification under Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Slum Areas Improvement and Clearance Act, 1971 [in short ''the Act''] was published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 08.11.1972 declaring the above area as a slum area. After the said Notification, no other proceeding contemplated under Sections 6 to 10 of the Act were taken by the TNSCB. There was no Notification under Section 11 of the Act declaring the area as a slum area. No steps were taken to acquire the land under Section 17 of the Act also. (4) However, the TNSCB addressed letters to the Commissioner, HR&CE, requiring his consent for transfer of these lands to the Board on payment of compensation which was to be fixed by a Committee constituted by the Government under G.O.Ms.No.337 dated 18.05.1981. The Committee consisted of the Collector of Madras, the Commissioner, HR&CE Administration Department and the Chief Engineer. A fantastic sum of Rs.7,000/- per ground was fixed for temple lands across the city which were to be transferred to the TNSCB. This was later increased to Rs.10,000/- per ground on 07.03.1990. These two Government Orders, in my opinion, are not https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis backed by any statutory power.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis (8) It appears that the TNSCB, at one point of time, took objections to the Executive Officer filing a writ petition without the permission of the 2nd respondent/Commissioner, HR&CE and in an attempt to arm twist, the Executive Officer required the Commissioner to direct the Executive Officer to withdraw the writ petition. The 2 nd respondent herein/Commissioner, HR&CE, fortunately did not succumb to the arm twisting tactics, but sought for the opinion of the Executive Officer on the request of the Board. The Executive Officer sent a detailed letter dated 12.04.2016 wherein he had pointed out that the land worth several Crores is sought to be snatched away from the temple by payment of a pittance as compensation. (9) The Executive Officer had also pointed out that a sum of Rs.59,23,407/- is due from the tenants of the land and he would go on to state that the rent has not been paid because of a projection by the TNSCB that this area would be a slum area and it will be taken over by the Board. Upon such take over, the residents would be assigned these lands. The Board did not pay the value of the land to the temple. It also prevented the tenants from paying rents to the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis temple. It was also pointed out by the Executive Officer that the area is no longer a slum and it has been well developed with various permanent buildings which had come in in the said place. Taking cue from the letters of the Executive Officer, the 2nd respondent/Commissioner wrote to the TNSCB on 12.09.2018 stating that the land is very valuable and it is required for the temple and therefore, the same cannot be alienated in favour of the TNSCB. (10) The 2nd respondent/Commissioner, HR&CE, has by his letter, exercised the power under section 34 and has rejected the request of the TNSCB for conveyance of the land. May be the area was declared as a slum area under Section 3 of the Act in the year 1972. But, no follow up action was taken up by the Board except for requiring the 2nd respondent/Commissioner, HR&CE to transfer the land to the Board. Now that the 2nd respondent/Commissioner, HR&CE has rejected the request of the TNSCB, the Board cannot pass the impugned order requiring the petitioner to receive the compensation determined by a Committee which has no statutory backing, that too, after a lapse of nearly 32 years. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis (11) Hence, the writ petition stands allowed and the order/communication impugned herein, is set aside. However, it is open to the TNSCB to exercise the power under Section 17 of the Act to acquire the land by paying the present day market value. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.