1 APHC010176952025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] TUESDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 9074/2025 Between: 1. G VEERA BHASKARARAO, S/O. NOOKALU, AGE 52 YEARS, RESIDENT OF NAGAMPETA, KOMARAGIRI POST, U.KOTHAPALLI MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT 2. KANDIPALLI SRINIVAS,, S/O. NAGARAJU, AGE 42 YEARS. RESIDENT OFVTC, KOMARAGIRI, U.KOTHAPALLI MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRI. SECRETARY, ENDOWMENTS DEPT. SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, AP, VIJAYAWADA 3. THE TAHSILDAR, MANDAL REVENUE OFFICE, U.KOTHAPALLI, KAKINADA DISTRICT 4. SRI SEETHA RAMA SWAMY VARI DEVASTHANAM, GOR ASA. REP BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, PITHAPURAM,U.KOTHAPALLIMANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be 2 pleased to pleased to issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th Respondent in issuing notice dated 17-03- 2025 and 27-03-2025 under Section 83(2) of Act, 30 of 87 and the Amending act 36 of 2023 by inclusion of property in 43 Register for eviction during the pendency of case in OA No. 529/2013 on the file A.P. Endowment Tribunal, Pedakakani, Guntur district and further trying to dispossess over the properties of 1st Petitioner to an extent of Ac. 2-54 cents in survey Nos. 121-7 and 122-6, and 2nd Petitioner to an extent of Ac. 0- 50 cents in survey No 122-16 sub-divisioned out of extent of Ac. 19-92 cents in survey Nos. 121 and 122 of Komaragiri Village, U.Kothapalli Mandal, Kakinada District as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings dated 17/20-03-2025 issued by the respondent No. 4, in respect of the lands of 1®‘ Petitioner to an extent of Ac. 2-54 cents in survey Nos. 121-7 & 122-6, & 2'^'^ Petitioner to an extent of Ac. 0-50 cents in survey No 122-16 of Komaragiri Village, U.Kothapalli Mandal, Kakinada District pending disposal of the writ petition and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to permit the petitioners/Proposed respondents 5 to 8 to implead and come on record as 5 to 8 respondents in WP No. 9074 of 2025 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. THOTA RAMAKOTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. KOTESWARA RAO KAPPERA SC For Endowments 2. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following: 3 ORDER:- Heard Sri Thota Ramakoteswara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Kotseswara Rao Kappera, learned Standing Counsel for Endowments, appearing for the 4th respondent. 2. Challenging the action of the 4th respondent in issuing notice dated 17.03.2025 & 27.03.2025 under Section 83(2) of Act, 30 of 87 and amending Act 36 of 2023 while the case in O.A.No.529 of 2013 on the file of A.P. Endowment Tribunal, Pedakakani, Guntur District is pending, the present Writ Petition has been filed. 3. Learned standing counsel appearing for the 4th respondent would submit that against the impugned notice issued under Section 83(2) Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987, the 1st petitioner has already filed an appeal before the Tribunal in A.S. No.16 of 2025, along with a stay application. Interim orders were also passed by the Tribunal and further submits that the 2nd petitioner, however, has not filed any appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Learned counsel further submits that in view of the same, the relief sought in the Writ Petition would not survive and no further orders are required to be passed in the Writ Petition. 4 4. Having regard to the same, the relief sought by the 1st petitioner is dismissed as infructuous, granting liberty to the 2nd petitioner to pursue the remedy available under law. 5. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date:08.07.2025 MVK 5 247 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 9074/2025 Date:08.07.2025 MVK