K. Balasubramani Vs. The Tamil Nadu Government represented by The Additional Chief Secretary to Government
This Supreme Court case involved a long-standing dispute between shop tenants and the management of the Arulmighu Dhandayuthpani Swamy Temple, Palani, administered under the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. The tenants, including K. Balasubramani and others, had occupied temple-owned shops for several years. After the expiry of their leases, they were declared “encroachers” under Section 78 of the Act. The temple authorities initiated ejectment proceedings, which were upheld by the High Court. The tenants challenged these orders before the Supreme Court, seeking protection from eviction and continuation of their occupancy.
Key Issues
Whether the ejectment orders against tenants of temple property under the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, were valid and enforceable.
Whether tenants, after the expiry of their leases, could claim continued occupancy or protection from eviction.
What relief, if any, could be granted to long-standing tenants in the context of temple property development and public interest.
Supreme Court’s Analysis
The Supreme Court affirmed that the temple management, as a public religious trust, is entitled to reclaim its property from encroachers and unauthorized occupants in accordance with the statutory scheme of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959.
The Court noted that the tenants’ original leases or licenses had expired, and no legal right to continued possession remained. The declaration of the tenants as “encroachers” was justified under Section 78 of the Act.
The Court recognized the temple’s intention to develop the property for the benefit of pilgrims and the public, and held that public interest must prevail over private claims to continued occupancy.
However, with a view to balancing equities and resolving the protracted litigation, the Court facilitated an amicable settlement between the parties.
Judgment
The Supreme Court affirmed the ejectment orders but directed that 51 tenants who had cleared their arrears of rent/occupation charges would be allowed to continue in possession for a further six months, subject to payment of revised rent, compliance with municipal by-laws, and prohibition on unauthorized construction.
The Court provided that, in case of future development of the property by the temple management, these 51 tenants would receive preferential treatment in allotment of new shops, provided they participate in the bidding process and match the highest bid.
For the 19 tenants who had not cleared their arrears, the temple management was permitted to initiate immediate proceedings for possession.
The Court directed closure of all pending litigation related to the demised premises, and warned that any breach of the agreed terms would result in contempt proceedings and eviction.
Significance
The judgment upholds the supremacy of statutory temple management in reclaiming and developing religious endowment property for public benefit.
It clarifies that tenants cannot claim perpetual occupancy after lease expiry, especially on public/religious trust land.
The decision also demonstrates the Supreme Court’s approach to balancing public interest, statutory rights, and equitable considerations in resolving long-standing property disputes.
Citation:
K. Balasubramani Etc. v. The Tamil Nadu Government & Ors., 2024 INSC 140, Supreme Court of India, Judgment dated 23 February 2024.
RELATED Blog
0 comments