JUDGMENT (Common Prayer: Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to call for the records pertaining to the orders dated 07.01.2022 passed by the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thanjavur, in CRP.Nos.1 of 2017; 32 of 2016; 7 of 2017; 35, 28 of 2016, respectively, confirming the orders dated 27.05.2016, passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Thanjavur, in P.T.Nos.337, 340, 333, 335, 341 of 2013, respectively.) Common Order: 1. These revision petitions are filed by the respective petitioners as against the fair and decreetal orders passed by the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thanjavur, in CRP.Nos.1 of 2017, 32 of 2016, 7 of 2017 & 35, 28 of 2016, respectively, dated 07.01.2022, in and by which, the orders passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Thanjavur, in P.T.Nos.337, 340, 333, 335 & 341 of 2013, respectively, dated 27.05.2016, were confirmed. 2. The first respondent Temple filed eviction petitions u/s.19(3) of the Public Trust Act before the Revenue Court, Thanjavur, as against the petitioners, that they are chronic defaulters in payment of rent. According to the first respondent Temple, the petitioners, who are cultivating tenants in their lands in the following extent, have not paid any rent and are having the following arrears of rent:- Petitioner in Extent of Land Arrears of rent CRP(MD). 1426/2022 1 Acre 14 Cents of S.No.412/2 in Vishnanpettai Village of Thiruvaiyaru Rs.4,30,625/-, from Fasali 1393 to 1421 CRP(MD). 1636/2022 17 Cents of S.No.27 in Thirukattupatti Village of Thiruvaiyaru Rs.29,000/- from Fasali 1409 to 1421 CRP(MD). 1669/2022 15 Cents of S.No.15/1, 44 Cents of S.No. 441, 44 Cents of S.No.442 in Vishnanpettai Village and Thirukattupatti Village of Thiruvaiyaru Rs.2,73,500/- from Fasali 1393 to 1421 CRP(MD). 1676/2022 70.5 Cents of S.No.29 in Thirukattupatti Village of Thiruvaiyaru Rs. 2,41,010/- from Fasali 1393 to 1421 CRP(MD). 1814/2022 1 Acre 34 Cents of S.No.21/1 in Thirukattupalli Village of Thiruvaiyaru Rs.3,98,650/- from Fasali 1393 to 1421 3. 1676/2022 70.5 Cents of S.No.29 in Thirukattupatti Village of Thiruvaiyaru Rs. 2,41,010/- from Fasali 1393 to 1421 CRP(MD). 1814/2022 1 Acre 34 Cents of S.No.21/1 in Thirukattupalli Village of Thiruvaiyaru Rs.3,98,650/- from Fasali 1393 to 1421 3. The Revenue Court, after providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioners, passed orders on 27.05.2016, fixing the arrears of rent as follows:- Petitioner in Arrears amount fixed by the Revenue Court CRP(MD).1426/2022 Rs.3,79,350/- CRP(MD).1636/2022 Rs.24,950/- CRP(MD).1669/2022 Rs.2,33,230/- CRP(MD).1676/2022 Rs.2,41,010/- CRP(MD).1814/2022 Rs.3,98,650/- The petitioners were also directed either to pay the arrears amount to the respondent or to deposit the same before the Court on or before 23.06.2016, failing which, the petitioners would be evicted from the land as per the provisions of the Public Trust Act. 4. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioners filed revision petitions before the Principal District Court, Thanjavur, in CRP.Nos.1 of 2017, 32 of 2016, 7 of 2017 & 35, 28 of 2016, respectively. The petitioners claimed that there are no arrears of lease amounts due to the respondent and the findings of the Revenue Court is not correct and they have also contended that the Revenue Court is not having powers to decide the arrears of rent for more than 3 Fasli years. The lower Appellate Court, holding that the petitioners have not produced any documents for the payment of lease amount and that the petitioners have not produced the receipt copies for payment of rent for all the Fasli years, confirmed the orders of the Revenue Court and dismissed the revision petitions. Aggrieved, the petitioners have moved the instant revisions. 5. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Revenue Court has not conducted the proceedings properly by examining the petitioners and without examining any other revenue authority, the Revenue Court has passed the orders in an erroneous manner. According to the learned Counsel, the Revenue Court can pass orders for payment of arrears of rent only for a period of 3 Fasli years and the orders passed by the Revenue Court directing the petitioners to pay arrears of rent for 29 Fasli years is beyond jurisdiction. Both the Courts below have failed to see the nature of cultivation of crops in the lands and failed to deduct the period of drought, which was exempted by the Government. Both the Courts below have failed to see the nature of cultivation of crops in the lands and failed to deduct the period of drought, which was exempted by the Government. The learned Counsel has also questioned the locus of the respondent to file the applications, when the respondent is not the Hereditary Trustee of the Temple, as per the scheme framed by the Court. 6. Learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that the respondent has been declared as the Hereditary Trustree, by the orders of this Court in A.S.No.378 of 1993. The respondent Temple has entered into a lease agreement with the fathers of the petitioners. After the demise of the fathers, the petitioners continued as lessees. However, they are chronic defaulters in payment of rent. Therefore, the respondent Temple initiated proceedings under Section 19(3) of the Act and the same were ordered, directing the petitioners to pay the arrears amount upto the Fasli year 1421, failing which, the petitioners would be evicted in terms of the Act. But, the petitioners neither paid the arrears amount nor they have vacated the premises. In fact, the petitioners have not paid the rent amount for the subsequent fasli years also, ie., from the fasli year 1421 till this fasli year 1431, the petitioners are having additional arrears of rent as follows:- Petitioner in Arrears of rent from Fasli 1421 to 1431 Overall Arrears of rent, till the Fasli 1431 CRP(MD). 1426/2022 Rs.2,61,040/- Rs.6,40,390/- CRP(MD). 1636/2022 Rs.41,115/- Rs.66,055/- CRP(MD). 1669/2022 Rs.1,91,985/- Rs.4,25,215/- CRP(MD). 1676/2022 Rs.1,59,860/- Rs.4,00,870/- CRP(MD). 1814/2022 Rs.3,18,770/- Rs.7,17,330/- 7. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on either side and perused the available materials. 8. The respondent herein has initiated proceedings under Section 19(3) of the Tamil Nadu Public Trusts (Regulation of Administration of Agricultural Lands) Act, 1961, as against the petitioners / tenants. The said applications were filed before the Authorized Officer under the Act and the Authorized Officer conducted an enquiry, allowed the applications with a direction to the tenants to pay the arrears of rent to the respondent trust, within a reasonable time. Not satisfied with that order, the petitioners have filed revision petitions and the lower Appellate Authority has also dismissed the revisions. 9. The main grievance of the petitioners is that they have not been provided with sufficient opportunity. Clause (b) of Sub Section 3 of Section 19 of the Public Trust Act reads as follows:- “19. Not satisfied with that order, the petitioners have filed revision petitions and the lower Appellate Authority has also dismissed the revisions. 9. The main grievance of the petitioners is that they have not been provided with sufficient opportunity. Clause (b) of Sub Section 3 of Section 19 of the Public Trust Act reads as follows:- “19. (3) (b) On receipt of such application, the authorized officer shall, after giving reasonable opportunity to the trustee of the public trust and the cultivating tenant to make their representations, hold a summary enquiry into the matter and pass an order either allowing the application or dismissing it and in a case falling under clause (a) of sub-section (1) in which the cultivating tenant had not availed of the provisions contained in sub-section (2), the authorized officer may allow the cultivating tenant such time as he considers just and reasonable having regard to the relative circumstances of the public trust and the cultivating tenant for depositing the arrears of rent payable under this Act inclusive of such costs as he may direct. If the cultivating tenant deposits the sum as directed, he shall be deemed to have paid the rent under clause (b) of sub-section (2). If the cultivating tenant fails to deposit the sum as directed, the authorized officer shall pass an order for eviction.” 10. A summary trial alone is provided under the Act and there is no restriction on the Authorized Officer to decide an application filed under Section 19(3) of the Public Trust Act confining to a period of three years. Here, the applications under Section 19(3) of the Act were filed before the Authorized Officer in the year 2013, numbered as P.T.Nos.337, 340, 333, 335 & 341 of 2013, respectively and were disposed of on 27.05.2016. 11. Certain rights and liabilities of cultivating tenant and public trust are contemplated under Chapter IV of the Act. As per Section 23 of the Act, every cultivating tenant under any public trust shall be bound to pay to the public trust trust and every public trust shall be entitled to collect from the cultivating tenant fair rent payable under this chapter. Fair rent is also defined under Section 24 of the Act that the fair rent shall be 25% of the normal gross produce or its value in money. The fair rent may be paid in cash or in kind. Fair rent is also defined under Section 24 of the Act that the fair rent shall be 25% of the normal gross produce or its value in money. The fair rent may be paid in cash or in kind. On default of any payment of rent, the trustee of every public trust is entitled to file necessary application under Sub-Section 3 of Section 19 of the Act to evict the cultivating tenant and the Authorized Officer, on such application, shall determine whether the amount deposited represents the correct amount of rent due from the cultivating tenant. 12. The proceedings shall be conducted by way of a summary trial and admittedly, the revision petitioners / tenants have entered appearance in the proceedings before the Authorized Officer. They have not produced any documents to show that they have paid the rent to the respondent / public trust, excepting producing xerox copies of receipts for certain fasli years. Though the receipts were produced as xerox copies, the same were also taken into account by the Revenue Court and after deducting the sum mentioned therein from the arrears of rent claimed by the respondent, the petitioners were directed to pay the balance arrears of amount. But, the petitioners have not made any attempt either to pay the amount to the respondent or to deposit the same before the Authorized Officer. The Authorized Officer passed this order on 27.05.2016, upto the Fasli year 1421. The petitioners neither paid this arrears amount, nor they have paid the actual rent for the subsequent Fasli years also and they have to pay the additional arrears of rent till this Fasli year 1431. 13. The xerox copies produced by the revision petitioners disclose that there is a practice of issuance of receipt by the respondent trust. But, the petitioners have not substantiated that the arrears of rent have actually been paid by them to the respondent, by producing the receipts for the same. In fact, the petitioners have disputed the authority of the respondent, but, even for that, they have not placed any materials to show that the respondent is not the authority to claim the rent. 14. In the absence of any such materials to prove that the petitioners have actually paid the rent or that the respondent lacks authority to claim the rent, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the orders of the Courts below. 14. In the absence of any such materials to prove that the petitioners have actually paid the rent or that the respondent lacks authority to claim the rent, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the orders of the Courts below. Accordingly, all the revision petitions stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are all closed.