MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Tuesday sought a counter affidavit from the state government on a PIL filed against the government’s decision to unblock the restriction against registering over 3,000 acres of inam lands connected to four temples in Karur.
A Radhakrishnan of Salem stated in his petition that an extent of 3,084.95 acres of inam lands belonging to four temples in Karur were protected from unlawful alienation through a ‘prohibitory module’ under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908. “This was a lawful measure taken to ensure that no land belonging to a religious institution was alienated without valid government sanction,” he added.
However, the Karur collector issued an order on July 9, recommending unblocking these lands following representations from 3,390 individuals who were ‘encroaching’ the lands. Based on this, the HR&CE commissioner and other authorities compelled the fit persons of the four temples to withdraw their requests for prohibition, rendering the above lands vulnerable to alienation without any statutory sanction, Radhakrishnan added.
Stating that the above orders infringe upon the property rights of Minor Idols and require immediate intervention of the high court, he requested the court to quash the orders.
When the plea was heard on Tuesday, Advocate General Vijay Narayan argued that the petitioner has no locus standi in the issue. He also referred to a recent judgment passed by the High Court that ryotwari pattas granted under the Minor Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1963, are documents of title.
The above individuals mentioned by the petitioner thus possess documents of title, and the same have been verified through a detailed inquiry by a committee, he further contended, adding that the aforesaid temples were also parties to the decision-making process. He also pointed out that the land owners are not a party to the PIL and further sought time to file a detailed counter. A bench of justices CV Karthikeyan and R Sakthivel directed the authorities concerned to file their respective counter affidavits by July 29 and adjourned the case to August 11.
