IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 21796 OF 2012 Between: 1. T.T.D. Kalyanakatta Mirasidai^s Sangam, Thirumala, Thirupathi, Chittoor District. Rep. By its General Secretary, K. Srinivasulu. 2. R. Amarnath, S/o. late R. Ranganayakulu, aged 49 years, occ: Barber (Badge No.238), Member of 1st Petitioner Association, R/o.Thiruchanur, Thirupathi Rural, Chittoor District. 3. A.M.V. Bali, S/o. late Madhurai, aged 38 years, occ: Barber (Badge No. 165), Member of 1st Petitioner Association, R/o. Chinthakayala Veedhi, Thirupathi, Chittoor District. ...PETITIONERS AND Thirumala Thirupathi Devasthanams, Thirupathi. Rep. by the Executive Officer. ...RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring that the Members of 1st petitioner Sangham alone has exclusive right to render the service of tonsuring to the pilgrims visiting Thirumala and to recruit its own members to carry on the service in accordance with the terms of the decree granted by the District Munsiff Court, Thirupathi in O.S.No.450/1952 and the respondent herein has no jurisdiction or authority to recruit/appoint any r members for the above said purpose and for a consequential direction not to regularly the service of any temporary staff appointed ignoring the claims /^^t^^^etitjpners and it is arbitrary, illegal and violative of Art.300-A of the bfIndia. 10 r m. -•.f kA. NO:>OF 2012(WPMP. NO: 27920 OF 2012) -r Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent herein not to make any appointments or regularize the service of the temporary staff appointed to perform the duty of tonsuring the heads of pilgrims who visit the Thirumala Thirupathi Temple to discharge their vows pending disposal of writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT. Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT. A CHANDRAVATHI Counsel for the Respondents: SRI A SUMANTH (SC FOR TTD) The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010305012012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY ,THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 21796/2012 [3457] f' I Between: T.T.D. Kalyanakatta Mirasidars Sangam, Thirumala, ...PETITIONER( S) and Others ' ’ AND Thirumala Thirupathi Devasthanams Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.ACHANDRAVATHI Counsel for the Respondent: I.Sri.A.Sumant The Court made the following: ...RESPONDENT II2II WP.No.21796 of 2012 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH. N WRIT PETITION No.21796 of 2012 ORDER: 1. The petitioners are seeking a direction in the nature of mandamus declaring that members of the 1®' petitioner-sangham alone have the exclusive right to render the service of tonsuring to the pilgrims visiting Tirumala and to recruit members to carry- on the service in accordance with” the terms of the decree granted by the District Munsif Court, Tirupati in OS.No.450 of 1992 and other directions that the respondent has no authority to appoint any members for the above purpose and also a direction to not regularize the services of any temporary staff. 2. The petitioner is the association representing its members who are tonsuring the heads of the devotees of Lord Venkateswara Swamy at the Kalyana Katta. The association is registered on 07.07.1924 under the name and style Sri Tirumala « Kalyana Katta Mirasidars Sangham. It is submitted that since petitioner’s Sangham were extending the services of tonsuring the heads of devotees. OS.No.450 of 1952 was filed by the 1®' petitioner when disputes between the 1®’ petitioner-sangham and the rival claimants. The suit was decreed on 22.02.1954. However, the then the members of the 1 arose 112,11 WP.No.21796 of 2012 respondent without considering the decree passed by the competent court in the suit filed by the 1®* petitioner, the respondent was going ahead with engagement of staff for extending the tonsuring of heads service through its employees were either employed directly or employed through an outsourcing contract. 3. Mr.A.Sumant, learned standing counsel for the respondent appearing virtually online submits that the writ petition is not maintainable and submits that the hereditary of Mirasidars were abolished as per Section 34 of the AP Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987. It is also submitted by the learned standing counsel for the respondent that Section 160 of the AP Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 reads as follows ; Sec.160. Overriding effect of the Act. (1) Not withstanding any compromise, agreement, scheme, judgment, decree or order of a Court, Tribunal or other authority or any custom or usage governing any charitable or religious institution or endowment of Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams, the provisions of this Act shall with effect on and from the date of the commencement of this Act, prevail insofar as they relate to the matters governed by the corresponding provisions in any such compromise, agreement, scheme, judgment, decree or order or any custom or usage and such corresponding provisions shall thereafter have no effect. (2) Notwithstanding anything in the agreements entered into by the Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams represented by the WP.No.21796of2012 Executive Officer and Archakam Mirasidars of Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams on the 30th May, 1979 or any other agreements of the like nature, the provisions of this Act shall with effect on and from the date of commencement of this Act, prevail insofar as they relate to the matters governed by the corresponding provisions in any such agreements and such corresponding provisions in such agreements shall thereafter have no effect. 4. It is also submitted by the learned standing counsel that in pursuance of an agreement between the Dharmakartha and the respondent during the year 1975 almost all member of Sangham were absorbed into TTD and their services were also regularized with the respondent-Devasthanam. 5. On account of abolition of Mirasidars with the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious and Endowments Act coming into force with effect from 04.04.1987. The writ petition has outlived its purpose. 6. That apart, the petitioner cannot invoke the jurisdiction of this Court as it is a settled law that Public Law remedy under Article 226 of Constitution of India cannot be invoked for execution of a decree passed by competent civil court in as much as an effective mechanism is provided under CPC. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ghan Shyamdas Gupta and another Vs. Anant Kumar Sinha and othersT The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that Public law remedy under Article 226 of Constitution of 11991 KHC 1030 -■a II5II WP.No.21796 of 2012 of the orders of 3 invoked for implementation india cannot be court. introduction of the cannot be adjudicated the respondents Munsif Court is abolished after 7. When the Mirasidars system of the petitioner direction to 1987 the grievance 0 Court seeking a Act, to before this implenient Tirupati in the District passed by the decree in OS.No.450 of 1952. the writ petition is dismissed without observations 8. With these costs. if any, shall stand sequel, pending miscellaneous petitigtis As a closed Sd/- N. NAGAMMA assistant REGISJRAR //true copy// SECTION OFFICER 1 To Chandravathi, Advocate [OPUCj for TTD) Advocate [OPUCj 1. OneCCtoSmt. A CC to Sri A Sumanth (SC 2. One 3. Three CD Copies TF & HIGH COURT DATED:03/02/2025 ORDER WP.No.21796 of 2012 ANi 15 MAR 2025 Current SecUon DISMISSING THE W.P., WITHOUT COSTS