IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:- 21-4-2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR W.P.No.6726 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2008 The Trustee Arulmigu Muthukumaraswamy Temple Devasthanam Vennandur Namakkal District. ... Petitioner/Petitioner Versus 1. The Secretary to the Government Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department St. Fort George Chennai 9. 2. The Executive Officer Vennandur Town Panchayat Rasipuram Taluk Namakkal District. ... Respondents/Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the relief of issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the order issued by the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.290/2006 dated 7.1.2008 and consequential notice in Na.Ka.No. 290/2006 dated 20.2.2008 quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to renew the lease period of the petitioner based on their request letter dated 2.1.2008 as per G.O.(MS) 92 dated 3.7.2007 issued by the 1st respondent. For Petitioner : Mr.Razhaq For Respondents : Mr.S.Shivashanmugam Govt. Advocate (R1) Mr.C.Ravichandran R2) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ O R D E R The petitioner temple has filed this writ petition challenging the order of the second respondent refusing to grant extension of lease in terms of G.O.(MS) No. 92 dated 3.7.2007. 2. The second respondent is the owner of certain extent of land adjacent to the petitioner temple and by proceedings dated 16.10.1984, the said lands were leased out to the petitioner on annual rental basis and in that land the petitioner put up semi permanent shops thereby earning some amount for running the affairs of the temple. The period of lease granted on 16.10.1984 was extended from time to time. While so, on 2.1.2008 the petitioner submitted an application to the second respondent for extension of lease in terms of G.O.(MS) No. 92 dated 3.7.2007 However, the second respondent refused to grant extension of lease on the ground that the writ petition filed by the petitioner in W.P.No.16217 of 2007 is pending on the file of this court. In this regard the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the said writ petition was filed not to dispossess the petitioner without due process of law and the petitioner is willing to withdraw the said writ petition, if the respondent would consider the petitioner's claim for extension of lease. The statement of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is recorded. 3. Since according to the second respondent, the only impediment is the pendency of the writ petition and in view of the undertaking given by the petitioner to withdraw the said writ petition, the second respondent is directed to consider the claim of the petitioner for grant of extension of lease in terms of G.O.Ms.No.92 dated 3.7.207 on an application made by the petitioner along with the copy of this order. It is made clear that till final orders are passed by the authority concerned as above, the possession of the petitioner need not be disturbed. 4. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Consequently, the connected M.P is closed. No costs. Sd/- Asst.Registrar /True Copy/ Sub.Asst.Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ krr/ To 1. The Secretary to the Government Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department St. Fort George Chennai 9. 2. The Executive Officer Vennandur Town Panchayat Rasipuram Taluk Namakkal District. W.P.No.6726 of 2008 UG(CO) Eu 10.5.11 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/