APHC010143412024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 7436/2024 Between: Sri Pyaraiah Anjaneya Swamy Devasthanam Abhivrudhi Samithi, and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. PONNADA SREE VYAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. J JANAKIRAMI REDDY 2. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following: ORDER:- Heard Sri Ponnada Sree Vyas, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri J.Janaki Rami Reddy, learned counsel for the unofficial 6th respondent and learned Government Pleader for Endowments. 2. The writ petition is filed for a direction to the official respondents to take action against the persons who have entered unauthorisedly into Ramalayam temple, which is Upalayam of Sri Pyaraiah Anjaneya Swamy Devasthanam, Basaladoddi. 2 3. It is contended that the Sri Pyaraiah Anjaneya Swamy Devasthanam, Basaladoddi, is an ancient temple constructed over 500 years ago by Vyasa Maharshi. The rituals of the said temple are being performed by family members of one Pujari Maruthi and Pujari Poligottaiah. The family members of the said family are doing puja rituals in Ramalayam also. However, certain unauthorized people have entered into the Ramalayam temple and have been performing archakatvam unauthorisedly. 4. The learned Assistant Government pleader for Endowments has passed on the instructions, received by him, in the case. 5. A perusal of the same would reflect that the Sri Pyaraiah Anjaneya Swamy Devasthanam, Basaladoddi, is categorized under the provisions of Section 6 (c) (ii) of Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987. It is stated that Sri Pyaraiah Anjaneya Swamy Devasthanam Abhivrudhi Samithi, represented by its President Sri Parasani Anumaiah R/o Basaladoddi (V) is absolutely private committee. It is stated that as per the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short “the Act”), the Endowments Department has not appointed any trustee or non-hereditory trust board to the subject temple. It is further stated that Sri Anjaneya Swamy temple, has landed properties in an extent of Ac.1.80 cents in Sy.No.299, an extent of Ac.4.55 cents in Sy.No.238 and an extent of Ac.1.00 cents in Sy.No.284 at Basaladoddi (V), Peddakadbur (M). It is further stated that in 2015 the village elders have constructed Sri Ramalayam temple 3 in the Sy.No.286 in an extent of Ac.0.20 cents by raising funds, on southern side of Sri Anjaneya Swamy temple and incorporated the same as a sub temple of Sri Anjaneya Swamy temple. Sri Anjaneya Swamy temple archakas are performing daily rituals at sub temple. It is stated that the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, Kurnool vide R.Dis.No.A6/4353/2021 Revenue dated 23.10.2021 has approved, under Section 43 of the Act, the Property Register, of Sri Anjaneya Swamy temple. It is further stated that the details of the sub-temple i.e., Sri Ramalayam, have been noted and approved under Section 43 of the Act. It is noted in the Register that one Sri P.Ramalinganna and Sri P.Ramakrishna are working as regular archakas of Sri Anjaneya Swamy temple, Basaladoddi (V). It is further stated that the respondents Nos.5, 6 and 7 i.e., Sri Srinivasulu (5), Sri Poligottu (6) and Raghavendra Chary Joshi (7) are in no way concerned with the sub-temple Sri Ramalayam. 6. The unofficial 6th respondent filed counter stating that both the temples are registered vide Registration No.198 of 2024 in the case of Ramalayam and also for Sri Anjaneya Swamy temple with Registration No.359 of 2021, and Ramalayam is a new temple constructed in the year 2015 in Sy.No.286 with the funds of the village elders and from the general public, the writ petitioner has no role whatsoever to interfere with the affairs of the Ramalayam temple. It is further contended that one Sri Pujari Poligottaiah had two sons i.e., Pujari Sarwaiah and another one is Pujari Shanmukappa. 4 Pujari Ramakrishna is related to Pujari Shanmukappa and 6th respondent Poligottu is related to Pujari Sarwaiah and the said Ramakrishna and 6th respondent are cousin brothers, who are looking after both the temples Anjaneya Swamy temple and Ramalayam independently and separately and Ramalayam temple. 7. Sri J.Janaki Rami Reddy, learned counsel for the unofficial 6th respondent in support of his submissions, relies on the following decisions, on maintainability of the writ petition: (i) the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Sitaram Khemka Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, (ii) the decision of this Court in the case of Panchaiti Akhara Bara Udasin Nirman Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, Endowments Department, Hyderabad and Others, (iii) the decision of this Court in the case of D.Satyanarayana and Others Vs. Secretary to Government, Legislature Department and Others, (iv) the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Teki Venkata Ratnam and Others Vs. Deputy Commissioner, Endowment and Others, (v) the decision of this Court in the case of Teki Venkata Ratnam and Others Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Kakinada and Another, (vi) the decision of this Court in the case of Raj Kumar Deen and Others Vs. A.S.Din, 5 (vii) the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of G.Narayanaswamy Reddy (dead) by L.Rs. and Another Vs. Government of Karnataka and Another. 8. Considered the submissions. 9. From perusal of the writ petition and the instructions of the 3rd respondent Assistant Commissioner and District Endowments Officer, Endowments Department, prima-facie, it would reflect that the register maintained under Section 43 of the Act, in the case of Anjaneya Swami temple, contains Ramalayam as Upalayam to the main temple and archaka (s) of the Sri Anjaneya Swami temple are performing archakatvam in the Upalayam. The Assistant Commissioner and District Endowments Officer, Endowments Department, also has endorsed the same, in his written instructions. Having regard to the same, the official respondents are under obligation to see that no unauthorized persons enter the temple either for its administration or to perform archakatvam. Having regard to the same, the 3rd respondent is directed to conduct enquiry and take appropriate action, against such of those persons who are unauthorisedly performing the rituals of the temple viz., Ramalayam Upalayam of Sri Anjaneya Swami temple, in accordance with law. 10. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 6 As a sequel, interlocutory applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. ____________________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date: 07.04.2025 ANI 7 191 THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION No.7436 of 2024 Date:07.04.2025 ANI