Judgment :- 1. The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus, prohibiting the respondents from conveying the temple property bearing S. No.454 to an extent of 54.50 acres of Punjai land situated on the Sriperumbudur Singa Perumal Koil 6 lane road to the 4th respondent in any manner. 2. Initially the petitioner had impleaded only the Managing Director of Apollo Tyres Limited as fourth respondent. 3. Subsequently, the petitioner impleaded the Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition and the Principal Secretary, Chairman and Managing Director, SIPCOT, as respondents 5 and 6. However, there are no averments in the affidavit against the respondent No.5, to justify the impleading of Tahsildar. 4. In support of the writ petition, the affidavit filed reads as under, "I, Venkateswaralu Naidu, S/o. Veerasamy Naidu, Hindu, aged about 75 years, the Kattalai Dharma Kartha of the Arulmighu Aabathsahaya Eswarar Temple residing at Bajanai Koil Street, Mathur Village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely state as follows:- 1. I submit that, I am the Kattalai Dharma Kartha of the petitioner temple as such I am well aware and acquainted with the facts of the case. 2. I submit that, the temple is a very old temple belonging to the 8th century and owning many properties at Mathur Village. The said temple is under the control of the first respondent who is managing the entire property of the temple. The petitioner and his ancestors had donated several lands to the temple in the capacity of Kattalai Dharma Kartha. 3. I submit that, of the various properties of the temple one property bearing S.No. 454 to an extent of 54.50 acres of Punjai land is situated on the Sriperumbudur Singa Perumal Koil 6 lane road. 4. I submit that, for developing industries SIPCOT had acquired lands at Mathur Village and allotted to various industries. Like wise land adjacent to the land bearing S.No. 454 to an extent of 54.50 acres, belonging to the temple, was also acquired by SIPCOT and allotted to the fourth respondent who is carrying on its industrial work there. 5. I submit that, from the date of the allotment of the land to the fourth respondent, the fourth respondent is trying to encroach into the temples land since it is lying on the Sriperumbudur Singa Perumal Koil 6 lane road. 5. I submit that, from the date of the allotment of the land to the fourth respondent, the fourth respondent is trying to encroach into the temples land since it is lying on the Sriperumbudur Singa Perumal Koil 6 lane road. SIPCOT had also made several attempts to take the land and hand over it to the fourth respondent. Since the general public vehemently opposed it, the fourth respondent leaving the said temple's land and another land belonging to third party had erected compound wall and running its industry. 6. I submit that, on 21.8.2009 the fourth respondent had made a written request to the petitioner and the third respondent requesting to sell the land in S.No. 454 to an extent of 54.50 acres in their favour. When the same was refused by the petitioner temple the fourth respondent tried to encroach into the said temple lands which was prevented by the temple with the help of local public. The first respondent is not taking any care to protect the temple property but in fact trying to take sides with the fourth respondent. 7. I submit that in this regard the villagers had made representation to the respondents to protect the temple property from the fourth respondent. The first respondent who is the custodian of the property is not taking steps to protect the property and myself and the other villagers are having our bonafide doubt that the first respondent may alienate the temple property to the fourth respondent. The fourth respondent is taking all steps to usurp the property and the respondents 1 to 3 are also colluding with fourth respondent and are trying to get the sale deed registered in the name of the fourth respondent. The fourth respondent due to the support of the respondents 1 to 3 are trying to fence the temple property along with their property. 8. I submit that, the temple coming under the first respondent, neither myself being the Katalai Dharma Kartha nor the public are able to prevent the respondents 1 to 3 from alienating the property to the fourth respondent, hence, this writ petition for the following amongst other grounds. GROUNDS A. That the temple is the absolute owner of property bearing S.No. 454 to an extent of 54.50 acres of Punjai land situated on the Sriperumbudur Singa Perumal Koil 6 lane road. GROUNDS A. That the temple is the absolute owner of property bearing S.No. 454 to an extent of 54.50 acres of Punjai land situated on the Sriperumbudur Singa Perumal Koil 6 lane road. B. That the fourth respondent is trying to take over the said property, since the same is lying on the Sriperumbudur Singa Perumal Koil 6 lane road and adjacent to their property allotted to them by SIPCOT. C. That the fourth respondent had on earlier occasions tried to encroach into the same which was prevented by the village people. D. That the fourth respondent on 21.8.2009 has written a letter to the first and the third respondent requesting them to alienate the property to it. E. That the respondents 1 to 3 are taking steps to alienate the said temple property to the fourth respondent. F. The first respondent who is the custodian and guardian of the temple property is now taking earnest steps to convey the property to the fourth respondent. Under these circumstances, it is respectfully prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to grant INTERIM INJUNCTION restraining the fourth respondent from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property bearing S.No. 454 to an extent of 54.50 acres of Punjai land situated on the Sriperumbudur Singa Perumal Koil 6 lane road by petitioner temple by an order of interim injunction till the disposal of the writ petition and thus render justice. For the reasons stated above it is respectfully prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other writ or order or direction in the nature of writ directing the respondents not to convey the temple property bearing S. No.454 to an extent of 54.50 acres of Punjai land situated on the Sriperumbudur Singa Perumal Koil 6 lane road to the 4th respondent in any manner and pass any further similar other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice." 5. A reading of the affidavit, even taken on face value shows that the writ petition is totally misconceived. It is not understood how the respondents can allocate the land belonging to the third party. If any acquisition proceedings have been taken out, the remedy with the petitioner is to challenge the acquisition proceedings in accordance with law. A reading of the affidavit, even taken on face value shows that the writ petition is totally misconceived. It is not understood how the respondents can allocate the land belonging to the third party. If any acquisition proceedings have been taken out, the remedy with the petitioner is to challenge the acquisition proceedings in accordance with law. In case there is any threat to property belonging to the petitioner, the remedy with the petitioner is to approach the Civil Court, to prove the allegations by leading evidence. 6. On the pleadings referred to above, the relief claimed cannot be granted by this Court. The writ petition therefore being totally misconceived is ordered to be dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected MP is also dismissed.