Illegal encroachment of temple property a crime against society: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court recently reiterated that fraudulent or illegal encroachment of temple properties is a crime against society (K Senthilkumar v. The Principal Secretary to Government of TamilNadu, Tourism, Culture and Religious Department and ors).The observation was made by Justice SM Subramaniam while upholding eviction proceedings against a man who claimed to be the leaseholder of certain property owned by the Arulmigu Agatheeswara Swamy Thirukkoil. ."Fraudulent and illegal encroachments of temple properties is a crime against the society at large. Misappropriation of the funds of the temple is undoubtedly an offence and all such offences are to be registered and the offenders are liable to be prosecuted by the State as the State is the controller of these temples and the offences are also committed against the State. Temple properties are allowed to be looted by few greedy men and by few professional criminals and land grabbers. Active or passive contribution and collusion by the officials of the HR & CE Department cannot be overruled. These lapses, negligence, dereliction of duty on the part of such public officials are also to be viewed seriously and all appropriate actions in this regard are highly warranted," the Court observed..The Court added that the property of temples, deities and Devaswom Boards should be protected by their trustees, Archaks, Sebaits or employees. .However, the Court added that there were many instances where persons entrusted with the duty of safeguarding temple property have usurped and misappropriated such properties, by setting up false claims of ownership, tenancy, or adverse possession.."This is possible only with the passive or active collusion of the concerned authorities. Such acts of 'fences eating the crops' should be dealt with sternly. The Government, members or trustees of Boards/Trusts, and devotees should be vigilant to prevent any such usurpation or encroachment. It is also the duty of courts to protect and safeguard the properties of religious and charitable institutions from wrongful claims or misappropriation," the Court opined..Public rights are involved in such matters and, as such, the Courts are expected to deal with such cases sternly, failing which the High Court would fail in its Constitutional obligations, the judge remarked further.."The High Court is not expected to close its eyes in respect of such patent illegalities in dealing with the temple properties. The High Court has its constitutional obligation in such circumstances to step-in and protect the interest of the minor idol and issue appropriate orders," stated the judgment. .In this case, the Court found that no documents were produced to support the alleged lease rights of the petitioner before it. The Court, therefore, concluded that the petitioner, as well as his father and uncle (who had earlier heard leasing rights, according to the petitioner), were encroachers and illegal occupants who used the temple property for personal and unjust gains. .The Court also took a serious view of the petitioner sub-letting of a super-structure built on the temple property for various purposes including for shops, a party hall, a gym, a restroom and a godown.."It is shocking that the temple properties are dealt with by these illegal occupants in an illegal manner and the Authorities though initiated action, this Court has to record that such actions initiated are not only insufficient, but raises a doubt about the active or passive collusion on the part of such Competent Authorities of the temple," the Court said. .Since the "deity" of the temple is a minor, the Court should be astute to protect the interests of such idol in any litigation, the Judge said. .When the Executive Officer or the custodian of the idol fails to act diligently and leaves the temple and its properties in a lurch, the Court is "to take notice of such facts and deal with the issues in an appropriate manner," he observed. ."The Court is bound to take notice of the fact that the Executive Officers appointed in the temples are being changed periodically and in many a case, they do not get fully acquainted with the history or affairs of the temple. If there is lapses, slackness or negligence on the part of the Executive Officer and the trustees of the temple, “it is the duty of the Court to ensure that the 'Deity' does not suffer thereby. The Courts should be astute to protect the interests of an idol in any litigation," read the judgment further. .The Court went on to reject the petitioner's plea against eviction proceedings and directed that an elaborate inquiry should be conducted by the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Department, while also factoring in the long period of the illegal possession of the temple property and the money made by the petitioner off this property. .If HR&CE authorities are also found to have colluded in the matter, further action is highly warranted, the Court said. .The judge, therefore, ordered that the authorities concerned should look into the "active or passive collusion on the part of the Authorities in dealing with the temple properties in such a manner and initiate appropriate action against all those Authorities, who have contributed for the maladministration of the temple properties.".The Court further directed the authorities to complete the eviction process and to conduct an enquiry to assess the financial loss suffered by the temple. Appropriate action should be taken against the persons concerned, the Court said. .On a related note, Justice Subramaniam had echoed allied views in another judgment pronounced the same day (September 15), wherein, he had also suggested the invocation of the Goondas Act to deal with extreme cases of temple encroachment. .[Read Judgment].[Temple Encroachment] Invoke Goondas Act in extreme cases: Madras High Court