IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESfO | ATAMARAVATI ^ (Special Original Jurisdiction)^ iAPHCOI 0552172024 > THURSDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER-^ TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SM^ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVa’ WRIT PETITION NOS: 28742 AND 30117 OF 2024. 14152 17283 AiId 20701 OF 2025 WRIT PETITION NO: 28742 OF 2024 Between: Sri Shaik k/f^aboob Peera, S/o Meera Saheb, R/o 10-801C, 10th ward, Vijaya Talkies Road, Markapur Town and Mandal, Prakasam"’ District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Principal Secretary Endowments Department, AP Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 2. The Commissioner, Endowment DepartmentTVijayawada NTR District. 3. The Assistant Commissioner, Endowment Department, Ongole, Prakasam District. 4. Sri Lakshmi Chennakesava Swamy vari Devastanam, Rep by its Executive officer, Markapur Town and Mandal, Prakasam District. ...Respondents Petition under Article 22^^ of the Constitution of India circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court pleased to issue any writ or order or direction more particularly nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order of the 4tfr praying that in the may be one in the respondent in issuing the orders passed in Rc. No.Lands- 6/2024, dated 18- 10-2\324 during pendency of the WP Nos.21592/2009 before this Hon'ble High court as illegal, arbitrary and without any jurisdiction and consequently set aside the said orders. ^ lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 to suspend the orders passed by 4th respondent in Rc. No. Lands- 6/2024 dated: 18-1^-?024 pending the Writ Petition in this Hon'ble Court. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI RAJA REDDY KONETI Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: GP Fok'ENDOWMENTS Counsel for the Respondent No. 4: M/s DEvVsUBHASHINI ENDOWMENTS ’w--' ANNE SC FOR APHC010572022024 Bris as WRIT PETITION NO: 30117 OF 2074 Between: 1. Kaveti Lakshmi Prasanna, w/o Kaveti Prasad, Shivaji Nagar, 4th lane. District. R/o D.No 7-2662N6, Markapur Town and Mandal, Prakasam / 2. Kandula SekharaYeddy, S/o Chennakesav reddy, R/o, 10-104 G-504, Sai nagar, Markapur Town and Mandal, Prakasam District. 3. Dug^ RedctiTNaga Swathi, D/o Duggi reddy Venkateshwara 7-662, shivajii nagar,7th lane, Sirinivas theatre reddy, R/o road, Markapur Town and Mandal, Prakasam District 4. Battula Pulla Reddy, s/o Chenna Redd, Age 54 Years, Door No. 8/8B, Near Radha Krishna Talkies, Markapuram Town, Markapuram, Prakasam District. Khumabagiri Ven'i^teshwara reddy, S/o Durga reddy, R/o Markapuram Town, Prakasam District. 5. ...Petitioners AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, EndowmeVits Department, AP Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati. The Commissioner, Endowment DepartVrlent, Vijayawada NTR District. The Assistant Commissioner, Endowment Department, Ongole, Prakasam District. Sri Lakshmi Chennakesava Swamy vari Devastanam, Rep by its Executive officer, Markapur Town and Mandal,Prakasam District. 1. 2. 3. 4. ...Respondents Petition under Article 22^of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in • issuing the Eviction orders and notices to the petitioners to an extent of Ac.0.27 cents in Sy.No 206/B of Markapuram Town, Prakasam District as illegal, arbitrary and without any jurisdiction and consequently direct the respondents not to alienate the said property during pendency of the WP No.21592/2009 before this Hon'ble High court. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 15T CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to alienate the property to an extent of Ac.0.27 14 cents in Sy.No 2067B of Markapurann Town, Prakasam District pending the Writ Petition in this Hon'ble Court. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI RAJA REDDY KONETI Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS Counsel for the Respondent NO. 4: M/s DEVI SUBHASHINI ANNE SC FOR ENDOWMENTS APHC010280362025 3 WRIT PETITION NO: 14152 OF 2025^ Between: 1. Golamari Venkala^Reddy, S/o Late Chinna Venkata reddy, R/o East, Bazar, Besides Radha krishna theatre, Markapu'r'town and Mandal, Prakasam District. 2. Golamari Krishna Reddy, S/o Late Chinna Venkata reddy, R/o East, Bazar, Besides Radha krishna ^eatre, Markapur Town and Mandal, Prakasam District. ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Endowments Department, AP Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 2. The Commissioner, Endowment Department, Vijayavi^a NTR District. 3. The Assistant Commissioner, Endowment Department, Ong^e, Prakasam District. 4. Sri Lakshmi Chennakesava Swamy vari Devastanam, Rep by its Executive officer, Markapur Town and Mandal,Prakasam District. ...Respondents 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 pleased to issue any writ or order or direction more particularly one in the of the 4tK"respondent in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action conducting lease auction dated 06-06-2025 for the property in Sy.1133 to an extent of Ac.2^0 cents of Markapuram Town and village, Prakasam District illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the 4th Respondent not to as conduct the said lease auction dt.06.06.2025. V'' lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section |51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated [petition, the High Court may be pleased to dated;06-06-2025 by the 4th extent of Ac.2.00 cents of in the affidavit filed in support stay the lease auction going to held on respondent for the property in Sy.1133 to an Markapuram Town & Village, Prakasam District pending the Writ Petition in this Hon'ble Court. lA 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 to suspend the orders passed by the 4rt respondent vide Rc.No.Lands -23/2024 dated 25/11/2024 pending the Writ Petition in this Hon'ble Court. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI RAJA REDDY KONETI Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS Counsel for the Respondent No. 4: M/s DEVI SUBhXsHINI ANNE SC FOR ENDOWMENTS APHC010345692025 WRIT PETITION NO: 17283 OF 2025 Between: 1. Golamari Venkata Reddy,, S/o Late Chinna Venk^ reddy, R/o East, Bazar, Besides Rad ha krishna theatre, Markapur^own and Mandal, Prakasam District. 2. Golamari Kristfna Reddy, S/o Late Chinna Venkata reddy, R/o East. Bazar, Besides Radha krishna theatre, Markapur Town and Mandal, Prakasam District. ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh Endowment^epartment, rep. by its Principal Secretary, AP Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 2. The Commissioner, Endowment Department, Vijayawada NTR District. 3. The Assistant Commissioner Endowment DepartVnent Ongole, Prakasam District. 4. Sri Lakshmi Chennakesava Swamy vari Devastanam, Rep by its Executive officer, Markapur Town and Mandal,Prakasam District. ...Respondents Petition under Article 226df the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any writ or order or direction more particularly one nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring respondent in issuing the orders passed 25/11/2024 as illegal, arbitrary and without any ju^diction and consequently set aside the said orders vide Rc.No.Land- 23/2024 dated 25/11/2024 illegal, arbitrary and consequently set aside the said lease auction. 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 to in the the impugned order of the 4th Rc.No.Land-23/2024 dated in as suspend the orders passed by 4trr'respondent vide Rc.No.Land-23/ 2024 dated 25/11/2024 pending the Writ Petition in this Hon'ble Court. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI RAJA REDDY KONETI Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: GP FOR ENDO\/\(iytENTS Counsel for the Respondent No. 4: M/s DEVI SUBHASHI^I ANNE SC FOR ENDOWMENTS APHC010396372025 Hra: WRIT PETITION NO: 20701 OF 2025 Between: LaWhmar^a, W/o Bala K^i reddy. R/o East. Bazar. MarkapurTown AND Mandal. Prak^sam Golamari Besides, Door.No.8/62, District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Endowments DeVartment, AP Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati.^ 2. The Commissioner, Endowment Department, Vijayawada NTR blWict. 3 7he Assistant Commissioner, Endowment Department, Ongole Prakasam District. 4. Sri Lakshmi Chennakesava Swamy vari Devastanam, Rep by its Executive officer, MarkapurTown and Mandal, Prakasam District. ...Respondents under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any writ or order or direction more particularly one in the Petition nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order of the 4th respondent in issuing the orders passed in Rc.No.Land-51/2025 dated 22/07/2025 as illegal, arbitrary and without any jurisdiction and consequently set aside the said orders vide Rc.No.Land- 51/2025 dated 22/07/2^525. lA 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 to suspend the orders passed by 4TH respondent vide Rc.No.Land- 51/2025 dated 22/07/2025 pending the Writ Petition in this Hon'ble Courts Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K CHINNA VENKAT REDDY ^ Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS Counsel for the Respondent No. 4: M/s DEVI SUBHASHINI ANNE SC FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following Common order; APHC010552172024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT 0:^0 [3458] 01^ THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE WRIT PETITION NOs:28742 & 30117 nf 9n9A MANDAVA 14152. 17283 & 20701 of 2025 WRIT PETITION NO: 28742/2024 Between: 1.SHAIK MAHABOOB PEERA, S/0 MEERA 10TH WARD, VIJAYA TALKIES ROAD, MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. SAHEB, R/0 4 0-801C, MARKAPUR TOWN AND ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. i AKIAI, 2.THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, VIJAYAWADA NTR DISTRICT. 3.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4.SRI LAKSHMI CHENNAKESAVA SWAMY VARI BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, MARKAPUR PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, DEVASTANAM, REP TOWN AND MANDAL ...RESPONDENT{S): of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court pleased to issue any writ or order or direction Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution may be more particularly one in the 2 of Mandamus declaring the impugned order of the 4th nature of Writ respondent in issuing the orders passed in Rc. No.Lands- 6/2024, dated 18- 10-2024 during pendency of the WP Nos.21592/2009 before this Honble High court as illegal, arbitrary and without any jurisdiction and consequently set aside the said orders and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 to suspend the orders passed by 4th respondent in Rc. No. Lands- 6/2024 dated; 18-10-2024 pending the Writ Petition in this Hon’ble Court 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 to grant leave to file the counter affidavit in W.P.No.28742 of 2024 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. RAJA REDDY KONETl Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1 .GP FOR ENDOWMENTS 2. DEVI SUBHASHINI ANNE SC For Endowments WRIT PETITION NO: 30117/2024 Between: 1 KAVETI LAKSHMI PRASANNA, W/0 KAVETl PRASAD, R/0 D.NO 7- MARKAPUR TOWN AND 2662N6, SHIVAJI NAGAR,4TH LANE MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 2.KANDULA SEKHARA REDDY, S/0 CHENNAKESAV REDDY, R/0, 10- SAl NAGAR, MARKAPUR TOWN AND MANDAL, 104 G-504 PRAKASAM DISTRICT. D/0 DUGGl REDDY SWATH 1 R/0 7-662, SHlVAJll NAGAR,7TH MARKAPUR TOWN AND 3. DUGGl REDDY NAGA VENKATESHWARA REDDY, LANE , SIRINIVAS THEATRE ROAD MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 3 4.BATTULA PULLA REDDY, S/0 CHENNA REDD, AGE 54 YEARS, DOOR NO. 8/8B, NEAR RADHA KRISHNA TALKIES, MARKAPURAM TOWN, MARKAPURAM, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5.KHUMABAGIRI VENKATESHWARA REDDY,, S/0 DURGA REDDY, R/0 MARKAPURAMTOWN, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI AMARAVATI. 2.THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, VIJAYAWADA NTR DISTRICT. 3.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4.SRI LAKSHMI CHENNAKESAVA SWAMY VARI DEVASTANAM, REP BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, MARKAPUR TOWN AND MAN DAL. PRAKASAM 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 pleased to issue any writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in issuing the Eviction orders and notices to the petitioners to an extent of Ac.0.27 Vi cents in Sy.No 206/B of Markapuram Town, Prakasam District as illegal, arbitrary and without any jurisdiction and consequently direct the respondents not to alienate the said property during pendency of the WP No.21592/2009 before this Hon'ble High court and pass lA NO; 1 OF 2024 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 to direct the respondents not to alienate the property to an extent of Ac.0.27 1/2 cents in Sy.No 206/B of Markapuram Town, Prakasam District pending the Writ Petition in this Hon'ble Court and pass 4 lA 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 to grant leave to file the counter affidavit in W.P.No.30117 of 2024 and Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.RAJA REDDY KONETI Counsel for the Respondent{S): 1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS 2.DEVI SUBHASHINI ANNE SC For Endowments WRIT PETITION NO: 14152/2025 pass Between: 1.GOLAMARI VENKATA REDDY, S/0 LATE CHINNA VENKATA REDDY, R/0 EAST, BAZAR, BESIDES RADHA KRISHNA THEATRE, MARKAPUR TOWN AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. S/0 LATE CHINNA VENKATA REDDY, R/0 EAST, BAZAR, BESIDES RADHA KRISHNA THEATRE, MARKAPUR TOWN AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 2.GOLAMARI KRISHNA REDDY ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH. REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2.THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, VIJAYAWADA NTR DISTRICT. 3.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4.SRI LAKSHMI CHENNAKESAVA SWAMY VARI DEVASTANAM, REP BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER MANDAL,PRAKASAM DISTRICT. MARKAPUR TOWN AND ...RESPONDENT(S): 5 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 pleased to issue any writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent i:: conducting lease auction dated 06-06-2025 for the property in Sy.1133 to an extent of Ac.2.00 cents of Markapuram Town and village, Prakasam District illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the 4th conduct the said lease auction dt.06.06.2025 in as Respondent not to lA 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 to stay the lease auction going to held on dated;06-06-2025 by the 4th respondent for the property in Sy,ll33 to Markapuram Town & Village, Prakasam District pending the Writ Petition i this Hon'ble Court lA 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 pleased to suspend the orders passed by the 4rt respondent Rc.No.Lands -23/2024 dated 25/11/2024 pending the Writ Petition in this Hon'ble Court and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.RAJA REDDY KONETI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS 2. DEVI SUBHASHINI ANNE SC For Endowments WRIT PETITION NO: 17283/2n2fi an extent of Ac.2.00 cents of in vide Between: 1.GOLAMARI VENKATA REDDY, S/0 LATE CHINNA VENKATA REDDY, R/0 EAST, BAZAR, BESIDES RAD HA KRISHNA THEATRE, MARKAPUR TOWN AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 2.GOLAMARI KRISHNA REDDY, S/0 LATE CHINNA VENKATA REDDY, BESIDES RADHA KRISHNA THEATRE, R/O EAST, BAZAR, 6 MARKAPUR TOWN AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2.THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, VIJAYAWADA NTR DISTRICT. . 3.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER. ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4.SRI LAKSHMI CHENNAKESAVA SWAMY VARI DEVASTANAM, REP BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, MARKAPUR TOWN AND MAN DAL, PRAKASAM 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 pleased to issue any writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order of the 4th respondent in issuing the orders passed in Rc.No.Land-23/2024 dated 25/11/2024 as illegal, arbitrary and without any jurisdiction and consequently set aside the said orders vide Rc.No.Land- 23/2024 dated 25/11/2024 as illegal, arbitrary and consequently set aside the said lease auction and pass lA 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 may be pleased to suspend the orders passed by 4*^^ respondent vide Rc.No.Land-23/2024 dated 25/11/2024 pending the Writ Petition in this Hon'ble Court and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.RAJA REDDY KONETI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 7 1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS 2.DEVI SUBHASHINI ANNE SC For Endowments WRIT PETITION NO: 20701/2025 Between: 1.GOLAMARI LAKSHMAMMA, W/0 BALA KASl REDDY, R/0 EAST, MARKAPURTOWN AND BAZAR. BESIDES, DOOR.NO.8/62, MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT,VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2.THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, VIJAYAWADA NTR DISTRICT. 3.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4.SRI LAKSHMI CHENNAKESAVA SWAMY VARI DEVASTANAM, REP BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, MARKAPUR TOWN AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstancesstated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order of the 4TH respondent in issuing the orders passed in Rc.No.Land-51/2025 dated 22/07/2025 as illegal, arbitrary and without any jurisdiction and consequently set aside the said orders vide Rc.No.Land- 51/2025 dated 22/07/2025 and pass lA 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 to 8 suspend the orders passed by 4TH respondent vide Rc.No.Land- 51/2025 ' dated 22/07/2025 pending the Writ Petition in this Hon'ble Court and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KCHINNA VENKAT REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS 2. DEVI SUBHASHINI ANNE SC For Endowments The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: Fleard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments and the learned Standing Counsel for Endowments appearing for the respondents. Since the issues involved in the above Writ Petitions are one and the same, it is appropriate to dispose of the cases by way of a ‘Common Order’. 2. 3. These Writ Petitions are filed challenging the impugned orders of the 4'^ respondent passed under Section 83(2) of Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Flindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (in short herein after referred as ‘the Act’). It is contended that the subject lands are Inam lands. Under the provisions of Section 77 of the Act, in case of Inam lands, it is the RDO, who has to conduct enquiry and pass orders for eviction of the unauthorized occupants, and resume the land. Thus, it is contended that in 4. r 9 the light of the said provisions, the notice issued under Section 83 of the Act is not sustainable. Both the learned counsel submit that the issue involved in all 5. the cases is covered by the order passed by this Court in W.P.Nos. 15005 & 15006 of 2025, dated 21.08.2025, thus prays for passing of the same order in the present case(s). Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are disposed of, in terms of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.15005 & 15006 of 2025, dated 21.08.2025. There shall be no order as to costs. 6. Registry is directed to append a copy of the order in W.P.Nos.15005 & 15006 of 2025, dated 21.08.2025 to this order. 7. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. Sd/- M.PRABHAKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// i . SECTION OFFICER To The Principal Secretary, Endowments Department, state of AP, AP Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati. ' The Commissioner, Endowment Department, Vijayawada NTR District. 3. The Assistant Commissioner Prakasam District. The Executive officer, Sri LakshmT Chennakesava Swamy Devastanam, Markapur Town and Mandal,Prakasam District. One CC to Sri. K Chinna Venkat Reddy Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sri. Raja Reddy Koneti Advocate [OPUC] One CC to M/s Devi Subhashini Anne SC For Endowments [OPUC] Two CCs to GP for Endowments, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 9. Two CD Copies (Along with a copy of the order in WP Nos. 15005 and 15006 of 2025 dated 21.08.2025) GSC 1. 2. Endowment Department, Ongole, 4. van 5. 6. 7. 8. i- rt^ I \ high court DATED;04/09/2025 4 COMMON ORDER WP NOS. 28742 AND AND 20701 OF 2025 30117 OF 2024, 14152, 17283 r X 22 SEP 2025 •a^ . CunenV Section ^ ^ DISPOSING THE WPS WITHOUT COSTS 1 APHC010301962025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) 0*^0 [3458] 0 THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE WIANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 15005/2025 Between: , R/0 1-121, .PINNEBOYINA SATYANARAYANA, S/0 SUBBAIAHMARKAPURAM VILLAGE 1 and POST, RAYAVARM MANDAL,PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1 THF STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT, SECRETARY VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2.THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, VIJAYAWADA NTR DISTRICT. 3.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT 4 SRI LAKSHMI CHENNAKESAVA SWAMY VARIDEVASTANAM, REP Iy ITC EXECUTIVE OFFICER, MARKAPUR TOWN AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM 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 pleased topleased to issue any writ or order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order of the 4th 2 ^025 .f I''"''"® i" «<=■ No asfde Z sT' ""y j^P^Pto'ion the sa,d orders vide Rc. No.-Nii/2025, dated 09-06-2025 jA NO: 1 OF 7{\oti in the affidavit filed fn^support oMhe pSn^h^ m" ‘he circumstances stated Pleased to suspend the orders passed by 4th responlutTRZNo^Tzllf . - Nil/2025, dated 09-06- consequently set ' and pass and clated;09-06-2025 and lA NO: 2 OF 9091; Patition under Section 151 ppp nr in the affidavit fiied in support of thLSn^h u" stated Pleased to vacate the intel ol‘ 3 C” ’ 07 2^5 ‘"“d a writ and pass -07-2025 and dismiss the above Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.K CHINNA VENKAT REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): GP FOR ENDOWMENTS DEVI SUBHASHINI ANNE SC For Endowments IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA at amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction) pass 1. 2. APHC01029632202S PRADESH [3458] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST TWO THOUSAND AND TWe“ty°fWe''°^®^ PRESENT the honourable smt justice WRIT PETITION NO: 15006/2025 KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Between: 3 1. VELPULA VENKATA REDDY, S/0 KONDA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS ,MARKAPURAM MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2.THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, VIJAYAWADA NTR DISTRICT. 3.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4.SRI LAKSHMI CHENNAKESAVA SWAMY VARI DEVASTANAM, REP MARKAPUR TOWN AND BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, MANDAL,PRAKASAM 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 pleased topleased to issue any writ or order or direction more particularlyone in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in passing orders vide Rc. No.Nil dated .09-06-2025 2025 during pendency of O.A No.24 of 2025 before the Hon'bie Andhra Pradesh State Endowments Tribunal at Pedakakani, Guntur as illegal, arbitrary and without any jurisdiction and consequently set aside the said order vide Rc. No. Lands-Nil dated.09-06-2025 and pass lA 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 suspend the orders passed by 4th respondent in Rc. No.-Nil dated:09-06-2025 pending the Writ Petition in this Hon'bie Court and pass lA 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 4 May be pleased to vacate the interim orders the above writ and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1 .K CHINNA VENKAT REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S); 1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS 2. DEVI SUBHASHINI ANNE SC For Endowments The Court made the following; COMMON ORDFR-- Heard Sri K. Chinna Venkat Reddy, learned and Sri V. Venugopal Rao, learned Senior respondents. dated 01-07-2025 and dismiss counsel for the petitioner(s) Counsel appearing for the 2. Since the issue involved in both cases is one and the same, it is appropriate to dispose of the cases by way of a ‘Common Order’. 3. The Writ Petitions are filed challenging orders of the 4‘^ respondent passed under Sec.83 (2) of Andhra Pradesh Charitable Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred and Flindu to as ‘the Act (30 of 1987’) vide RC.No.Nil/2025 dated 09.06.2025. 4. It is contended that the 4“^ respondent issued a notice stating that the 4'" respondent temple is the absolute owner of the subject property however, the petitioner(s) therefore, the petitioner(s) were asked to show were in occupation of the subject property, cause/explain as to why he 5 should not be treated as an encroacher within the meaning of the provisions of Sec.83 (2) of the Act (30 of 1987) and be evicted accordingly. 5. It is contended by the temple authorities that the respondent is the absolute owner of an extent of Ac 3.80 cents of land in Sy. No.635 of Markapuram town, which is inam land meant for Thulasi Pushpamala Nowkri Service’. The register maintained under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966 (Act 17 of 1966) and Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (Act 30 of 1987) also shows that the said extent of Ac-3.80 cents is the property of the temple. It Is stated by the respondents in the said notice that in view of the amendments made to the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956, in 2013 stating that in case of any service inams, the temple alone is entitled for ryotwari patta and if, any pattas were granted in favour of those persons who th had rendered service to the temple, are null and void. Observing thus, the 4 respondent passed the impugned proceedings requiring the petitioner(s) to vacate from the subject land within 15 days from the date of receipt of the order. Therefore, they approached this Court. 6. This Court vide order dated 01.07.2025, directed the respondents not to take any coercive measures against the petitioner(s) pursuant to the impugned proceedings dated 09.06.2025. 6 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner(s), referring to provisions of Sec.75 of the Act (30 of 1987), contends that mortgage, or lease of an Inam land granted for the of the Charitable Institution any sale, gift, or exchange, support and maintenance or Religious Institution, for performance of a religious or public charity or service shall be null and void. Unless the same is effected with prior sanction of the government, and he further view of the provision of Sec.77 of the Act (30 of 1987), it is the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), who can conduct an enquiry and pass orders for eviction in the cases of inam lands, in which the institution or the endowment has an interest. contends that in 8. The learned counsel for the petitioner(s) thus argues that the impugned proceedings are without jurisdiction. It is further contended that the petitioner(s) has also filed an O.A. before the A.P. State Endowments Tribunal, Pedakakani, Guntur, in O.A. No. 24 of 2025, and the same is still pending. When the said O.A. is pending, the respondents have passed the impugned proceedings. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner(s) relies on the decision of this Court in the case of Takkella Lakshminarasaiah Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and others\ wherein it is observed that; ‘47. Section 4(4) ivas repealed earlier and now, substituted by another clause shown in italics. According to 2020 (3)ALD 29 (AP) (DB) sub-section (4) of Section 4, substituted by Act No. 16 of 2013 is given effect from 26.11.1956 i.e., giving retrospective effect from the date of commencement of original enactment, where an inam land is with a burden to render service, or for performance of a religious or public charity, remuneration for performance of certain customary service, to an institution or endowment, no person shall be entitled to Ryotwari Patta, and the institution or Endowment alone shall be entitled to Ryotwari Patta for such Inam land without restriction of extent and without the condition of personal or as a any cultivation. And a judgment in W.P.No.28866 of 2024 and 28869 of 2024. 10. The respondents filed a counter-affidavit stating that the petitioner(s) are in unauthorized and unlawful occupation of the temple property. The petitioner(s) was never a servicedar, he has encroached on the property without the authority of law. Therefore, notice was issued under Section 83 (2) of the Act (30 of 1987). 11. The learned Senior Counsel, Sri Venugopal Rao, appearing for Smt. Devi Subhashini Anne, the learned Standing Counsel for the 4‘^ respondent, referring to the register maintained under Section 43 of the Act (30 of 1987), submits that the inaam was granted for a specific service, namely, thulasi pushpamala seva. In terms of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956, in such a case, the temple alone is entitled to the issuance of a ryotwari patta; the service holder is not entitled to a ryotwari patta. 8 12. The learned Senior Counsel would further submit that the petitioner(s) has an effective alternate remedy before the Tribunal without availing the said remedy under Sec.87 of the Act. The petitioner(s) has approached this Court, which is unsustainable. It is further argued that when inaam was granted for a specific purpose of rendering some service to the temple, the said property would not gain the characteristics of an absolute property of the inaamdhaars/service holders. 13. Considered the submissions. 14. For adjudication of the issues raised in the case, it is relevant to extract the provisions of Sec.75 and 77 of the Act (30 of 1987). ‘Sec.75. Lease, sale of Inams to be void in certain cases:- (1) Any lease 1[XXXX] and any gift, sale exchange or mortgage of an inam land granted for the support or maintenance of charitable religious institution or endowment or for the performance of a religious public charity or service, shall be null and void unless any such transaction not being a gift, is effected with the prior sanction of the Government. or or (2) Such prior sanction may be accorded by the Government where they consider that the transaction is- (i) necessary or beneficial to the institution or endowment; (ii) in regard to the land which is an uneconomical holding for the institution or endowment to own and maintain; and (Hi) the consideration thereof is adequate and proper. (3)The provisions in clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 80 shall apply for the sale of any inam land. Sec 77. Resumption of Inam lands:- motu or on the Divisional Officer may, either suo (1) The Revenue application of the trustee of a charitable or religious institution or endowment or of the Commissioner or of any person having interest in endowment authorised by the Commissioner, by order, such inam land referred to in the institution or the whole or any portion of any Section 75 on all or any of the following grounds namely:- resume transaction which is null and [ilthat the holder of the Inam has effected a void under Section 75; mthat mo charitable or religioas hstitution or endowment has ceased to exist or the charily or service has become impossible of performance: rnthat Ihe holder of such inam land has failed to perform or mate the necessary arrangements for performing, in accordance with the custom or usage of the institution or endowment, the charity or setvice for the performance of which the inam land was granted. under sub-section (1), the Revenue an order (2}(a)Before passing Divisional Officer shall give notice to Ihe trustee, to the Commissioner, the holder of the inam land, to the person in possession of the inam thereof and to the alienee, if any, of the to land where he Is not the holder inam land and also publish a copy of the notice in such manner as may be prescribed, which publication shall be deemed to be sufficient notice be affected by such order; and consider after holding such inquiry as may be prescribed. to every other person likely to the objections, if any, (b)Where only a portion of the inam land is affected, notice shall be given under clause (a) to the holder of such podion as well as to the holder or holders of Ihe other portion or portions to the person in possession of every such podion. where he is not the holder thereof and to the alienee, if any. of every such podion and the obiections of a such persons shall be considered by the Revenue Divisional Officer. passed under sub-section (1). shall be mentioned in sub-section (2)and (3) A copy of every order communicated to each of the persons shall be published in the manner prescribed. 10 [^}[§}Where 3ny inam land or portion thereof iIS resumed under this grant a ryotwari to the charitable section, the Revenue Divisional patta in respect of the h religious institution r ground specified h Officer shall, by order, mam land or portion thereof or concerned; and where the resumption is made on m Item (ii) of Sub-section (1) to as the Commissio any such charitable or religious institution nermay recommend. (hlThe order, application made to the prescribed be made in this behalf granting the ryotwari patta under clause (a) shall. Revenue Divisional on Officer within the time ‘n accordance with such rules executed by him ii as may be (^Pending the resumption section on the ground Revenue Divisional Officer of an inam land or portion thereof under this specned in item (Hi) of sub- section (1). the 'netn tend or portion thereof TpaXeTl -.e . .e insbtutlon or cndoZ::^::^^ Olulsionsi Orticer mey pass 3“ ”“^ considers and the or or make such necessary for the performance arrangement as he charity or service; recovered from the thereo,f as if they were of the shall be mam land or portion expenses incurred therefor person in possession of the h arrears of land revenue. 15. In the light of the above Revenue Divisional Officer trustee of the endowments Commissioner by order land referred to i ‘ provisions of the Act (30 of 1987) or on application filed by the on the application of the any such Inam , the may either suo moto or charitable institution or resume the whole or any portion of in Sec.75 of the Ac, (30 of 1987) in ,he cases of lands referred to in Sec.75 of the Act (30 of 1987). After such resumption, the Revenue Divisional Officer shall, by order, grant ryotwari land or portion thereof to the Charitable patta in respect of the Inam or Religious institution concerned. 11 16. Having regard to the above, even according to the respondents the subject lands are Inam lands, therefore the same would fall under Sec.75 of the Act (30 of 1987). Hence, in terms of Section 77 of the Act (30 of 1987), it is the RDO who must initiate proceedings to resume the lands, not the Executive Officer acting under the provisions of Section 83 of the Act (30 of 1987). The provisions of Section 83 of the Act (30 of 1987) would not apply to the instant case. 17. According to the respondent, the subject lands are Inam lands. Without expressing any views on the merits of the issue as to the entitlement to ryotwari patta, this Court is of the view that the provisions of Sec.83 of the Act (30 of 1987), will not apply in the facts of the present case. In the light of the provisions of Sec.77 of the Act (30 of 1987), the 4*' respondent has jurisdiction to initiate proceedings under Sec.83 of the Act no (30 of 1987). Accordingly, the proceedings impugned in the Writ Petitions are set aside. However, this order will not preclude the 4‘^ respondent temple from the remedies available to it under the law. availing 18. The Writ Petitions are accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date:21.08.2025 MVK 12 215 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NOS:15005 & 15006 OF 2025 Date;21.08.2025 MVK