L. Prithviraj (died) and P. Venkatavasan vs The Commissioner, HR and CE Department, The Joint Commissioner, HR and CE Department and The Joint Commissioner/Executive Officer, Arulmigu Meenakshi Sundareswarar Thirukkoil

M. Venugopal, J.—The second Petitioner''s father (since deceased) who filed the present writ petition, has sought for the relief of issuance of a Writ of Certiorari in calling for the records of the first Respondent dated 27.10.2005 in R.P. No. 276/2005 D2 and to quash the same.

It is to be noted that in R.P. No. 276/2005 D2 dated 27.10.2005, the first Respondent/Commissioner, HR and CE Department, Chennai - 34, has passed an order in paragraphs 3 to 5 as follows:

"3. Thiru R. Subramanian, Counsel appeared for the Petitioner and Thiru P. Gopalan, Counsel appeared for the second Respondent Joint Commissioner/Executive Officer of the suit temple. I have heard the counsel for Petitioner and the Counsel for the second Respondent and perused all the connected records. As directed by the High Court, the Joint Commissioner/Executive Officer has furnished the working sheet for fixation of fair rent on 05.09.2005 and has also duly informed the Petitioner that as per orders of the High Court in W.P.7008/2005 dated 02.08.2005 the Petitioner should pay a sum of Rs. 1,24,467/- as 50% of the difference in rent. The High Court has observed in clear and specific terms that the Commissioner shall ascertain whether the Petitioner has made the said payment as stated above or not and then entertain the Revision Petition and dispose of it on merits and in accordance with law.

It is ascertained through the Counsel for the second Respondent Joint Commissioner/Executive Officer that no amount has been paid either within 2 weeks from the date of High Court''s Order, or till 18.10.2005 on which the Counsel for the second Respondent filed the memorandum. In support of the memorandum the Counsel filed a copy of the letter dated 14.10.2005 received from the Joint Commissioner/Executive Officer informing that the Petitioner had not paid the amount of 50% of the revised rent.

In view of the non-compliance of the order passed by the High Court the Petitioner is not entitled to file the revision petition and maintain the same. Hence, the revision petition be and is hereby dismissed as not maintainable."

In effect, the first Respondent/Commissioner, HR and CE Department, Chennai - 34, has dismissed the revision in R.P. No. 276/2005 D2 filed by the second Petitioner''s father (since deceased) namely the writ Petitioner.

At this stage, the learned Counsel for the third Respondent/Joint Commissioner/Executive Officer, Arulmigu Meenakshi Sundareswarar Thirukkoil, Madurai, brings it to the notice of this Court that as per G.O. No. 456 Tamil Development, Charitable Endowments and Information (A. Ni.4-2) Department, dated 09.11.2007, the fair rent will have to be fixed in regard to the temple''s houses, lands, shops and vacant sites for the period from 01.07.1998 to 30.10.2001 as per the Fair Rent Advisory Committee.

In view of the fact that G.O. No. 456 Tamil Development, Charitable Endowments and Information (A. Ni.4-2) Department, dated 09.11.2007, supersedes the earlier G.O. No. 353, Tamil Development-Culture and Charitable Endowments Department, dated 04.06.1999, nothing survives in this writ petition for adjudication and it is open to the authorities concerned to follow the G.O. No. 456 Tamil Development, Charitable Endowments and Information (A. Ni.4-2) Department, dated 09.11.2007, in true letter and spirit in regard to the fixation of fair rent in respect of the shop/portion occupied by a tenant/legal representative of the tenant and in that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of without costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.