✦ Madras High Court

Mohamed Ishaik v. Rajaji Salai

Writ Petition No. 11142 of 20242 min read

Case at a glance

Outcome

Disposed of

This writ petition is disposed of accordingly with the above directions

Provisions considered

Key paragraphs

  • Para 44. Considering the limited nature of relief sought in the writ petition and also the fact that issue is also required to be clarified, let the 2nd respondent-Tahsildar issue clarification as to whether the entry 'exempted temple land' (nfhapy; epy';fs; tpyf; fspf; fg; gl; lit)…

Judgment

W.P.No.11142 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 06..06..2024CoramTHE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMARWrit Petition No.11142 of 2024 Mohamed Ishaik ..... Petitioner-Versus-1.The District Collector, Chennai District, Rajaji Salai, Chennai 600 001.

2.

The Tahsildar, Purasaivakkam Taluk, Chennai 600 007.

3.

The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034...... Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 12.02.2024. 1 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.11142 of 2024 For Petitioner(s):Mr.A.Syed KaleeshaFor Respondent (s):Mr.G.Ameedius, Government Advocate for RR1 & 2Mr.K.Karthikeyan, Government Advocate (HR & CE) for R3ORDERThis writ petition has been filed seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 12.02.2024 made by the petitioner seeking to clear the ambiguity with regard to the term “exempted temple land”.2. The case of the petitioner is that he is the joint owner of the property being all that house, ground and premises bearing Door No.23, Mosque Street, Pulianthope, Chennai 600012, Veppery village bearing O.S.No.357, 367, R.S.No.1736/1 and R.S.No.1736/20 (as per patta R.S.No.1736/269, Block No.39, C.C.No.684, admeasuring 1304 square feet and lying in the Registration District of Chennai Central and Sub Registration District of Periamet. Though his name is entered in the Permanent Land Register in respect of the subject property, in one of the clauses, it is stated that the land is exempted temple land. Based on such classification, the Sub Registrar, Periamet refused to register the document presented by him and directed him to seek clarification 2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.11142 of 2024 from the Tahsildar. Though he made an application in this regard, there is no response from the 3rd respondent. Hence, this writ petition. 3. Heard both sides.

Operative part

4.

Considering the limited nature of relief sought in the writ petition and also the fact that issue is also required to be clarified, let the 2nd respondent-Tahsildar issue clarification as to whether the entry 'exempted temple land' (nfhapy; epy';fs; tpyf; fspf; fg; gl; lit) denotes any right over any temple property. The 2nd respondent shall give suitable reply to the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This writ petition is disposed of accordingly with the above directions. No costs. Index: yes / no 06..06..2024Neutral Citation: yes / noSpeaking / Non Speaking OrderkmkTo1.The District Collector, Chennai District, Rajaji Salai, Chennai 600 001.2.The Tahsildar, Purasaivakkam Taluk, Chennai 600 007.3.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034.3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.11142 of 2024 N.SATHISH KUMAR.J.,kmk W.P.No.11142 of 202406..06..20244 of 4

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: This writ petition is disposed of accordingly with the above directions

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Constitution of India — art. 226.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Madras High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 11142 of 2024). ← Search more judgments