JUDGMENT 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the cost of the land extending 0.98.5 Hectares in S.No.195/5 and 195/7 at the same rate as fixed by the Special Commissioner and Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department by his order dated 23.06.1999 with interest. 2. The arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate representing the respondents are heard. 3. A total extent of 2.18.5 Hectares comprised in Survey Nos.195/5 and 195/7 in Thiruthuraipoondi Village admittedly belonged to Arulmighu Bhava Ouzhadheeswaraswami Thirukkoil, Thiruthuraipoondi, which Temple, represented by its Executive Officer, is the petitioner in the writ petition. The Government proposed to build a hospital for public benefit and the said land was identified to be a suitable piece of land for the said purpose. The Government decided to proceed with the acquisition of the property not by using eminent domain, but by having a private negotiation and following the procedure contemplated under the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, since the property belonged to a public Temple. Pursuant to the said decision, negotiations were held and before the conclusion of such negotiations, the District Collector of Thiruvarur, passed orders on 23.06.1999 permitting the respondents 1 to 4 to take possession of 1.20.0 Hectares being part of Survey No.195/5 and to start construction of the building for use as hospital. Thereafter, proposals were made for fixation of price and for the sale of the said land to the Government and necessary sanction for the sale of the land was sought for from the Special Commissioner and Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments, Administration Department, Chennai. 4. The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Chennai, accorded sanction for the sale of 1.20.0 Hectares forming part of Survey No.195/5 by virtue of the powers conferred on him under Section 34 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, by his order dated 23.06.1999. The price of the land was fixed at Rs.47.50 per square feet with an enhanced value at the rate of 150%. Thereafter, with some delay and after persuasion and steps taken on behalf of the Temple, a sum of Rs.91,99,218.60 came to be paid as the price for the said land extending 1.20.0 Hectares. 5. The price of the land was fixed at Rs.47.50 per square feet with an enhanced value at the rate of 150%. Thereafter, with some delay and after persuasion and steps taken on behalf of the Temple, a sum of Rs.91,99,218.60 came to be paid as the price for the said land extending 1.20.0 Hectares. 5. Subsequently, the fourth respondent viz., the District Collector, Thiruvarur, issued a proceeding in Na.Ka.28918/2004 U2 dated 20.10.2004 directing the second respondent to take possession of the remaining extent of land comprised in Survey No.195/5 and also an extent of 0.76.0 Hectares comprised in Survey No.195/7 and put up a compound wall including the entire extent of 2.18.5 Hectares in anticipation of sanction being accorded by the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Chennai. In the very same proceedings, the fourth respondent also asked the second respondent to immediately start the construction work, besides directing the Executive Engineer of Public Works Department (Buildings and Maintenance) to complete the construction work that had been undertaken on the 1.20.2 Hectares of land, possession of which had already been taken. Pursuant to the above proceedings of the fourth respondent, the respondents 1 to 3 have enclosed the entire extent by a compound wall without even paying the land cost and without initiating proceedings for acquisition of the land exercising the State's eminent domain. 6. The Executive Officer of the petitioner Temple seems to have sent communications to the respondents for payment of the price of the land at the same rate at which 1.20.0 Hectares of land was sought to be sold with the permission of the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department. After repeated reminders, the respondents seem to have taken a stand that the property is in the clutches of unauthorised encroachers and hence, unless the Temple clears the property by evicting the encroachers, they would not be in a position to proceed with the proposed acquisition. 7. After repeated reminders, the respondents seem to have taken a stand that the property is in the clutches of unauthorised encroachers and hence, unless the Temple clears the property by evicting the encroachers, they would not be in a position to proceed with the proposed acquisition. 7. The contention of the petitioner, on the other hand, is that having chosen to take possession of the land on the premise that such possession was taken in anticipation of permission being obtained from the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department and having delayed the payment of price for 1.20.0 Hectares of land, possession of which had been taken earlier and construction work had been started earlier, the respondents have chosen to come forward with such a flimsy excuse only to escape from the inability to arrange funds for the payment for the balance extent. 8. The present writ petition has been filed for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the cost of the land extending 0.98.5 Hectares comprised in Survey Nos.195/5 and 195/7 on the premise that the petitioner Temple is prepared to transfer the title to the Government (Health Department) in respect of the entire extent comprised in both the Survey Numbers. Section 34 of the said Act states that a sale of any immovable property belonging to a religious institution shall be null and void, unless such a sale is sanctioned by the Commissioner, as such sale being necessary or beneficial to the institution. Of course, when the Government wanted the property of the petitioner Temple, the Temple came forward to sell the land to the Government and the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department by his proceedings in Se.Mu.Na.Ka.14296/99 R1, dated 23.06.1999 accorded sanction for the sale of 1.20.0 Hectares of land out of 1.42.5 Hectares of land comprised in Survey No.195/5 at the base rate of Rs.47.50 per square feet with an increase of 150% arriving at Rs.91,99,218.60 as the total amount of consideration. Of course, the said amount has been paid subsequently after some delay and after persistent appeal. The respondents, not stopping with that, have chosen to take possession of the remaining extent of land also viz., 0.98.5 Hectares. Of course, the said amount has been paid subsequently after some delay and after persistent appeal. The respondents, not stopping with that, have chosen to take possession of the remaining extent of land also viz., 0.98.5 Hectares. It is obvious from the proceedings of the fourth respondent in Na.Ka.28918/2004 U2 dated 20.10.2004 that the fourth respondent not only permitted the second and third respondents to take possession of the land, but also directed the Executive Engineer (Public Works Department) to take steps for starting the construction work in the said area also. Prior to the issuance of the said proceedings, no application seeking sanction of the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department for the sale of the said property came to be filed. The order also does not state that steps had been taken in anticipation of sanction being accorded under Section 34 of the said Act. Possession was sought to be taken not with the permission of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department. On the other hand, the act on the part of the fourth respondent seems to be an autocratic act without following the procedure prescribed for acquisition of land for the use of the Government Department. 9. In case a land is needed for a public purpose, either the State can acquire it using its eminent domain by adopting the procedure contemplated in the land acquisition laws or getting transferred under it, by having a private negotiation with the owner. In this case, the fourth respondent seems to have adopted neither of the said procedure. When the same was taken note of by the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Chennai, the same resulted in the issuance of the proceedings of the Commissioner in Na.Ka.54824/2005/D1 dated 17.09.2005. By the said proceedings, the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department had given power to the Executive Officer to conduct proceedings on behalf of the Temple. At the same time, by proceedings in Na.Ka.54824/2005/D1 dated 21.09.2005, the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department has directed the Executive Officer to take steps for the recovery of the sale price for 1.20.0 Hectares of land, possession of which had already been taken by the respondents. At the same time, by proceedings in Na.Ka.54824/2005/D1 dated 21.09.2005, the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department has directed the Executive Officer to take steps for the recovery of the sale price for 1.20.0 Hectares of land, possession of which had already been taken by the respondents. In the said proceedings, the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department has also directed the Executive Officer of the petitioner Temple to take necessary follow up action for retrieving the remaining extent from the concerned authorities which were unilaterally taken over by them. The related portion of the proceedings in Na.Ka.54824/2005/D1 dated 21.09.2005 is extracted hereunder: "Tamil" 10. When such is the clear direction issued by the Sanctioning Authority viz., the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, the Executive Officer of the petitioner Temple or any body representing the petitioner Temple cannot legally effect any transfer of the property of the Temple without first approaching the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments and getting necessary sanction for the same. Defying the said direction and much against the direction issued by the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments, the present writ petition seems to have been filed for a direction to the respondents to pay the cost for the remaining extent also, as if the Temple is empowered to sell the remaining extent of 0.98.5 Hectares also. 11. As the writ petition has been filed in utter disregard of the order passed by the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Chennai, the relief sought for in this writ petition is bound to be rejected. Accordingly, this writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. The Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments department shall take necessary steps to protect the interest of the Temple in respect of its property. No costs.