JUDGMENT 1. The fourth respondent, Arulmighu Sellandiamman Thirukoil, at Perundurai owns the land measuring 10.87 acres at Perundurai in S.No. 787/1, 2, 3, 4 & 5. This temple is a public temple for which a scheme has been settled and as per the scheme, Kadaikulam and Medhikulam sect of Kongu Vellalar Gounder community have to administer the temple. 2. In 1982, the 5th respondent was granted lease of the land measuring 4.02 acres by the temple authorities for establishment of a school along with three buildings thereon. The monthly rent was fixed at Rs.750. There was no written lease agreement. 3. A written registered lease agreement was entered into on 1.10.1994 for a period of three years. The rent was fixed at Rs. 5,029/-per month. However there was no renewal of lease deed executed between the parties. 4. Section 34 A(1) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act 1959 ("the Act" for the short), provides for the constitution of lease rent fixation committee. The second respondent, the fourth respondent and the District Registrar are the members of the said Committee. The said Committee fixed the monthly rent of the aforesaid land and the buildings thereon at Rs. 50,812.40. By an order dated 14.12.2004, the fourth respondent communicated the aforesaid fixation of rent by the committee to the fifth respondent. 5. Aggrieved against the aforesaid order, the fifth respondent school filed revision before the first respondent under Section 21 of the Act. In fact, they should have preferred appeal to the first respondent under Section 34-A(3) of the Act. The first respondent disposed of the Revision in R.P.No. 5 of 2005 by a detailed order dated 14.11.2006 by setting aside the order dated 14.12.2004 of the fourth respondent and remanding the matter to the fourth respondent to refix the rent in the light of the observations made in the order. 6. Aggrieved against the said order, the fifth respondent filed further revision before the Tamil Nadu Government under Section 114 of the Act. 7. The Tamil Nadu Government disposed of the Revision Petition on 18.1.2010 by remanding the matter back to the lease rent fixation committee with a direction to fix the lease rent as per G.O. 456, Tamil Development Religious Endowments and Information Department, dated 9.11.2007. 8. 7. The Tamil Nadu Government disposed of the Revision Petition on 18.1.2010 by remanding the matter back to the lease rent fixation committee with a direction to fix the lease rent as per G.O. 456, Tamil Development Religious Endowments and Information Department, dated 9.11.2007. 8. On remand, the lease rent fixation committee fixed the lease rent for the demised property at Rs.54,079/- per month with effect from 1.11.2001 by an order dated 9.7.2010. As per G.O.No. 456, 15% increase in the rent was made once in three years and Rs.95,168/- was fixed as lease rent as on 9.7.2010. 9. The fourth respondent communicated the fixation of the rent by the committee in the order dated 14.8.2010 to the fifth respondent. The fourth respondent also stated that the fifth respondent shall pay the arrears of Rs. 71,56,284/-. 10. This time, the fifth respondent filed appeal under Section 34-A(3) of the Act before the first respondent against the said order dated 14.8.2010 of the fourth respondent communicating the monthly lease rent at Rs.95,168/-as on 9.7.2010 and demanding Rs.71,56,284/- as rental arrears from 1.11.2001. The appeal was taken on file in A.P.No. 42 of 2011. 11. The first respondent disposed of the appeal on 21.9.2011 and issued a direction to the fourth respondent to take necessary action to refix the rent by calculating on square foot basis for the land with building and on per acre basis for vacant land used as play ground. The first respondent also issued a direction to the fifth respondent to remit Rs.16,04,006/- representing 25% of the arrears of rent within one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order before the fourth respondent. 12. The writ petitioner filed this writ petition to quash the aforesaid order dated 21.9.2011 of the first respondent. 13. The petitioner is a worshipper of the Arulmighu Sellandiamman Thirukoil. He belongs to Kadaikulam and Medhikulam sect of Kongu Vellalar Gounder community. He was also the Joint Secretary of the Perundurai Kadaikulam, Medhikulam Narpani Mandram. He was also the Executive Committee member in the Annaithu Thiruvilakal Nadathum Committee. 13. The petitioner is a worshipper of the Arulmighu Sellandiamman Thirukoil. He belongs to Kadaikulam and Medhikulam sect of Kongu Vellalar Gounder community. He was also the Joint Secretary of the Perundurai Kadaikulam, Medhikulam Narpani Mandram. He was also the Executive Committee member in the Annaithu Thiruvilakal Nadathum Committee. Though a scheme was framed by the Deputy Commissioner of H.R. & C.E Department by an order dated 7.12.1970 under Section 64 of the Act providing for administration by five non-hereditary trustees from the two sects of Kadaikulam and Medhikulam Gounders of Perundurai Village, the non-hereditary trustees are not appointed as per the scheme. In those circumstances, the petitioner is involved in various activities including Kumbabishekam of Arulmighu Sellandiamman Temple. 14. According to the petitioner, the fifth respondent was granted lease in respect of 4.02 acres only along with three buildings thereon and the fifth respondent has encroached in the vacant land of the temple to an extent of 2.50 acres for using the same as play ground. The petitioner finds fault with the first respondent for stating that the fifth respondent is using 2.50 acres as play ground and to fix the rent for the same as the same was encroached upon by the fifth respondent. The petitioner has also objected for fixing the rent based on acreage for the vacant land. 15. Though the fifth respondent initially questioned the maintainability of the writ petition at the instance of the writ petitioner, the same was not pressed subsequently. The matter was argued on merits. The learned counsel for the fifth respondent has fairly submitted that this court may fix the rent as per G.O.No.353 dated 4.6.1999 and G.O.No.456 dated 9.11.2007, Tamil Development, Religious Endowments and Information Department. 16. The learned counsels for the respondents 1 to 3 and 4 have also submitted that this court may fix the rent as per G.O.No.353 and G.O.No.456 referred to above. 17. I have heard at length the learned counsels representing all the parties. 18. Now it is not in dispute that the area leased out to the fifth respondent school is 4.02 acres. It is also not in dispute that three buildings belonging to the temple that stand on the aforesaid land were also leased out to the fifth respondent. Another undisputed fact is that the School has also constructed nine buildings on the aforesaid land measuring 4.02 acres. 19. It is also not in dispute that three buildings belonging to the temple that stand on the aforesaid land were also leased out to the fifth respondent. Another undisputed fact is that the School has also constructed nine buildings on the aforesaid land measuring 4.02 acres. 19. The third respondent initiated a proceeding during October 2010 before the second respondent for removal of encroachment of vacant land measuring 2.50 acres by the fifth respondent. The proceeding was initiated under Section 78 of the Act. This 2.50 acres of vacant land is used by the fifth respondent as play ground. The fifth respondent has admitted the same. Based on the statement made by the fifth respondent that the school is using 2.50 acres of vacant land as play ground, the second respondent disposed of the proceeding initiated under Section 78 of the Act on 8.8.2012 by directing the lease rent fixation committee to take steps to fix the lease rent for 2.50 acres. 20. I am not concerned with the fixation of rent for the aforesaid 2.50 acres of vacant land that is used as play ground by the fifth respondent. 21. The issue involved in this writ petition is relating to fixation of lease rent for 4.02 acres of land and the three buildings that stand on the aforesaid land. The following four factors are relevant for fixation of lease rent:- i) The value of three buildings belonging to the temple standing on the leased out area, ii) The value of the lands on which the three temple buildings stand, iii) The value of the lands on which the nine buildings of the school stand and, iv) Appurtenant land within the leased out area of 4.02 acres of land. 22. As stated above G.O.No. 353 governs the fixation of the lease rent of the temple properties. G.O.No. 456 brought amendment to G.O.No.353. In my view, G.O.No.353 is more relevant for the purpose of this case for fixation of lease rent and the entire G.O.No.353 is extracted hereunder:- “TAMIL” 23. As per G.O.No.456, the lease rent shall be fixed as on 1.11.2001. Therefore, if G.O. 353 is read along with G.O.No.456, the lease rent has to be fixed as on 1.11.2001. The calculation with respect to fixation of lease rent has to be made as per G.O.No.353. 23(i). As per G.O.No.456, the lease rent shall be fixed as on 1.11.2001. Therefore, if G.O. 353 is read along with G.O.No.456, the lease rent has to be fixed as on 1.11.2001. The calculation with respect to fixation of lease rent has to be made as per G.O.No.353. 23(i). As per G.O.No. 353, 0.20% of the value of the building owned by the temple is a part of the lease rent. This is as per clause 2(iii) of G.O. No.353. 23(ii). Likewise, 0.20 % of the value of the land on which the building owned by the temple stands forms part of lease rent. This is as per clause 2(iv) of G.O.No. 353. 23(iii) Similarly, 0.20% of the value of the land on which the buildings that were constructed by the School stand also form part of the lease rent. This is also as per clause 2(iv) of G.O.No.353. 23(iv). Lastly, 0.10% of the value of the appurtenant vacant land also forms part of the lease rent. This is based on clause 2(v) of G.O.No.353. 23(v). The aforesaid methodology is accepted by all the parties. 24. Out of 4.02 acres leased out to the School, buildings belonging to the temple and the buildings belonging to the School put together stand on 1.63 acres i.e. 3 buildings of the temple and 9 buildings of the School stand on 1.63 acres. It is not in dispute that both the parties have also no quarrel to arrive the value of 1.63 acres of land on which the buildings stand, on square foot basis. However, there is a dispute as to whether Rs.181 per sq.ft. has to be taken to arrive the value of the 1.63 acres or Rs.333.20 per sq. ft has to be taken to arrive the value of 1.63 acres. While the fifth respondent claims that Rs.181/- per sq.ft shall be the basis, Rs.333.20 per sq. ft shall be the basis, according to the petitioner and the fourth respondent. The answer to this question shall result in finding the answer to factors (ii) and (iii) mentioned in para 21. 25. As far as the appurtenant vacant land to the buildings viz., 2.39 acres (4.02 -1.63 = 2.39) is concerned, while the school pleads that the value should be based on acreage, the petitioner pleads for arriving the value of the land based on sq. ft basis. 26. 25. As far as the appurtenant vacant land to the buildings viz., 2.39 acres (4.02 -1.63 = 2.39) is concerned, while the school pleads that the value should be based on acreage, the petitioner pleads for arriving the value of the land based on sq. ft basis. 26. In fact, based on the order dated 19.6.2012 in M.P.Nos. 2 and 3 of 2012 in W.P.No.642 of 2012, this Court issued a direction to the Fair Rent Fixation Committee to submit two provisional calculations, one on the basis of per square foot value for both the land on which buildings stand and the vacant land, and the other on the basis of per square foot value for the land on which building stand and per acre value for the vacant land alone. 27. Pursuant to the aforesaid direction, the fourth respondent filed a report in the form of a typed set dated 31.7.2012 containing 23 pages. As per the report, the fair rent as on 1.11.2001, 1.7.2004, 1.7.2007 and 1.7.2010 based on square foot value for the land on which buildings stand and per acre value for the vacant land are Rs.47,921/- ; Rs.55,109/-; Rs.63,375/- and Rs.72,880/- respectively. As per the report, the fair rent as on 1.11.2001, 1.7.2004, 1.7.2007 and 1.7.2010 based on square foot value for both the land on which buildings stand and vacant land are Rs.62,395, Rs.71,755, Rs. 82,518/-and Rs.94,895/- respectively. 28. Though the learned counsel for the 5th respondent is agreeable for fixing the lease rent on the basis of per square foot value for the land on which the buildings stand and per acre value for the vacant land, the learned counsel for the fifth respondent submitted that the value of the land per acre is taken as Rs.84,58,200/- and it should be based on Rs.2,03,000/- per acre. Further, it was submitted that the value of the land on which the buildings stand was calculated at the rate of Rs.333.20/- per sq. ft. According to him, it should be at the rate of Rs. 181/- per sq. ft. He relied on the letter dated 11.10.2011 of the Sub-Registrar, Perunthurai to the fourth respondent. The same is extracted hereunder: “TAMIL” 29. On perusal of the letter dated 11.10.2011 of the Sub-Registrar, Perunthurai, the value of the subject land per square foot is Rs.181/- . According to him, it should be at the rate of Rs. 181/- per sq. ft. He relied on the letter dated 11.10.2011 of the Sub-Registrar, Perunthurai to the fourth respondent. The same is extracted hereunder: “TAMIL” 29. On perusal of the letter dated 11.10.2011 of the Sub-Registrar, Perunthurai, the value of the subject land per square foot is Rs.181/- . Hence the calculation of the lands on which the buildings stand, based on Rs.333.20 per sq. ft worked out by the Fair Rent Fixation Committee is erroneous. It should be based on Rs. 181/- per sq. ft to arrive at the value of the lands on which the buildings both the temple buildings and the buildings built by the School stand. 30. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the fourth respondent submitted that after arriving the value of the lands, on which both the buildings stand, the Committee took 0.10% of the value to fix the lease rent as per G.O.No.353 and it should be 0.20% of the value to fix the lease rent. 31. I have perused the worksheet filed by the Committee that is found in the typed set dated 31.7.2012 referred to above. The Committee erroneously proceeded to fix the rent at the rate of 0.10% of the value of the lands, on which buildings stand. 32. Still the issue has to be resolved as to whether the value of the vacant land has to be fixed based on square foot basis or per acre basis. 33. In fact, the vacant land is really the appurtenant land to the buildings. If it is the vacant land like play ground, then the value of such vacant land could be fixed per acre basis. Since the vacant land with which we are concerned are appurtenant land to the 12 buildings (3 buildings of the temple and 9 buildings built by the school), I am of the view that the value shall be fixed on square foot basis. Hence, I do not agree with the submission of the learned counsel for the fifth respondent that the value of the vacant land shall be fixed on per acre basis. 34. When the matter was heard, I directed the fourth respondent to work out the value on sq. ft basis at the rate of Rs.181/-per sq. Hence, I do not agree with the submission of the learned counsel for the fifth respondent that the value of the vacant land shall be fixed on per acre basis. 34. When the matter was heard, I directed the fourth respondent to work out the value on sq. ft basis at the rate of Rs.181/-per sq. ft for the lands on which the buildings stand and also for the vacant land (i.e. for the total land of 4.02 acres) and to fix the lease rent at 0.20% of the value of the lands on which the buildings stand and 0.10% of the value of the vacant land. As far as the fixation of the value of the three buildings of the temple is concerned, the learned counsel for the fifth respondent has not disputed. Therefore, the lease rent at 0.20% of the value of three buildings are concerned, there is no dispute. 35. The fourth respondent filed a worksheet fixing the lease rent per month at Rs.47,743/- as on 1.11.2001, Rs.54,905/- as on 1.7.2004; Rs. 63,142/- as on 1.7.2007 and Rs.72,809/- as on 1.7.2010 and the said work sheet forms part of this order and the same is enclosed along with this order. The fifth respondent is directed to pay current monthly rent at Rs.72,809/- every month. The fifth respondent is directed to pay the arrears based on the aforesaid rates within a period of two months from the date of the receipt of a copy of this order. 36. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs.