Temple deity is a minor; encroachment of temple land infringes upon deity's rights: Madras High Court

In a recent order directing local authorities to rid a temple property in Kancheepuram district of encroachers, the Madras High Court said that the temple deity was to be considered a minor, and that any delay in freeing such land will amount to infringement of the rights of the minor deity [T Thanthoni and others v Executive Officer]..In an order passed on April 26, Justice SM Subramaniam said that the land grabbers' attempts to encroach upon temple property and to make commercial gains of the same was "intolerable" and had to be dealt with urgently. "The land grabber's attempt to take away the temple land in any form is intolerable. Any litigious occupation of the temple property, which is more valuable and causing loss to the temple, are to be dealt with appropriately without any loss of time. Loss of time would result in infringement of the right of a Deity, who is a minor," the order said. .The Court was hearing a batch of pleas filed by 20 petitioners, all claiming to be agricultural cultivators, challenging the eviction proceedings initiated against them by the respondent temple. The petitioners were members of an agricultural cooperatives society that in turn had entered into a lease agreement with the temple in 1969. As per the agreement, the temple land was to be used by the society's members for agricultural cultivation. However, while the lease ended in 1981, the petitioners continued to occupy the said land, and also defaulted on the rent payable to the society. The society was subsequently liquidated and in 2012, a local revenue court issued an eviction order against the petitioners. The revenue court also directed them to pay the arrears of rent that are now worth over ₹50 lakh. .The petitioners, however, challenged the eviction order and subsequent proceedings, arguing before the High Court that they had not been given a fair hearing as mandated under the Tamil Nadu Public Trust Act, 1961. The respondent counsel argued that the petitioners had no locus standi to invoke the provisions of the Public Trust Act against the temple, since the subject property belonged to the temple and there was no agreement between the temple and the petitioners..The High Court noted that most of the petitioners had stopped cultivating agricultural produce in the said land years ago, and that they were instead sub-letting the land to third parties and making commercial gains out of the same."This court is of the considered opinion that the cases on hand are classic cases, where under the guise of the membership of the third respondent-Society, the writ petitioners are attempting to continue in the temple property without any authority and in the absence of any tenancy agreement. The cultivating activities also are not being done. Even as per the respondent temple, the petitioners have started subletting the property for commercial purposes and earning huge money for personal gains, which is unjust and illegal," the High Court said while dismissing the plea. It also directed the Kancheepuram District Collector to implement the 2012 eviction order passed by the revenue court. In 2019, in another order on illegal encroachments, Justice Subramaniam had directed State authorities to remove all encroachments made in the name of religious institutions. At the time, the judge had said that the temple deity was a legal entity and any encroachment, even if made in the deity's name, will have to be dealt with in accordance with law..Advocate A Palaniappan appeared for the petitioners. Senior Advocate R Singaravelan, Advocate VS Jagadeesan and Additional Government Pleader T Arunkumar appeared for the respondent temple. Government Advocate K Karthikeyan appeared for the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department..[Read Order]