It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the original writ petitioner is no more. It is seen that the Temple authorities have also not been made as parties to the Writ Petition. The learned counsel for the petitioners drew the attention of this Court to the proceedings of the Tahsildar, dated 03.03.2006, wherein the name of the person who is sought to be substituted as second petitioner in the place of the deceased first petitioner, has been incorporated in the records. Learned Government Advocate submitted that the period of lease is already over and that in any event, the relief sought for in this Writ petition may not be granted by this Court, as the petitioner will have to seek relief only before appropriate civil forum. Without adverting to any of the submissions made supra, as the original writ petitioner is no more, this Court dismisses this Writ Petition and permit the person who is sought to be substituted as second petitioner to agitate her remedy in accordance with law. The relief sought for as such in the present Writ Petition cannot be granted. The substitution petition in W.M.P.No.25179 of 2017 was allowed by this Court today (07.09.2017), though the petitioner in the substitution petition, has no locus-standi for substituting her in the place of the deceased first petitioner as a matter of right. With these observations, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. W.P.M.P.No.40315 of 2003 is closed.
07.09.2017 cs To
1. District Collector, Trichy District.
2. Tahsildar, Thottiyam Taluk, Thottiyam, Trichy District.
3. The Commissioner, Thottiyam Union, Thottiyam, Trichy District.
4. The President, Mullipadi Panchayat, Mullipadi, Thottiyam Taluk, Trichy District.
5. Inspector of Police, Thottiyam, Trichy District.
S.VAIDYANATHAN, J cs W.P.No.33329 of 2003 07.09.2017