Madras High Court dismissed plea against temple on park land in Tiruvallur, holding it part of public space. Court ruled structure aids relaxation and well being, rejecting claims of illegal encroachment within residential layout.
The Madras High Court recently dismissed a writ petition challenging the existence of a temple allegedly built on land earmarked as a park and playground within a residential la yout in the Tiruvallur district. The court held that the structure could not be regarded as an illegal encroachment, stating that it formed part of the public space.
The court observed,
”The construction of the temple and worship of Deity is also a way for relaxation, which promotes the mental well-being of majority of residents of the subject layout. Therefore, at any cost, the temple has to be considered as a part and parcel of the park and as a place for relaxation, which reduces the mental stress of the people,”
The petition
The case was filed by Jesudass Cornelius, who sought directions to district authorities and municipal officials to preserve the open space reserved for park and playground purposes in an approved layout dating back to April 20, 1960.
The petitioner claimed that the authorities failed to safeguard the designated open space and instead allowed a Hindu temple to be established within the reserved area.
Before the court, the petitioner argued that the approved layout clearly set aside portions of land for recreational use, and that any deviation from that plan undermined the purpose of such reservation. He also contended that the temple was not included in the original layout and had been constructed in violation of planning norms.
The respondents opposed the petition. They submitted that the temple had been in existence for over five decades, and that it occupied only a small portion of the total land. They argued that the structure did not stop the remaining land from being used as a park or playground.
The authorities also indicated that they were willing to consider the petitioner’s representations if relevant documents were provided.
Court’s findings
A bench comprising Justice Krishnan Ramasamy, after considering the pleadings and records, noted that the layout did reserve space for a park and playground. However, the court also found that the temple had existed for more than 50 years and that the petitioner had approached the court only after an inordinate delay.
The court acknowledged that public parks are important for recreation, physical activity, and environmental balance, and serve as vital community spaces. At the same time, it noted that places of worship support mental well-being and social cohesion.
The court reiterated in its reasoning,
”The construction of the temple and worship of Deity is also a way for relaxation, which promotes the mental well-being of majority of residents of the subject layout. Therefore, at any cost, the temple has to be considered as a part and parcel of the park and as a place for relaxation, which reduces the mental stress of the people,”
The court recorded that the temple occupied only part of the total 9000 sq. ft. land, leaving a substantial area available for park-related activities. It therefore concluded that the continued existence of the temple did not prevent the maintenance or use of the remaining land as a park and playground.
ALSO READ: “Juristic Entity Can’t Have Mens Rea”: SC Quashed Criminal Case Against HDFC Bank
Rejecting the encroachment allegation, the court held that the temple was ”part and parcel” of the park and served a public purpose. The court also said that disturbing the structure at that stage would affect the faith and beliefs of a large number of local residents.
The court took a serious view of the timing and intent behind the challenge. It observed that raising objections after several decades reflected mala fide intent and appeared aimed at creating communal disharmony.
Accordingly, the court dismissed the writ petition and imposed costs of Rs. 1 lakh on the petitioner. It directed that the amount be paid to the Tamil Nadu Legal Services Authority within four weeks. If the petitioner failed to comply, the court instructed the district collector to initiate revenue recovery proceedings.
Case Title: Jesudass Cornelius vs. The District Collector, Thiruvallur District and others
FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE