APHC010307032014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3310] FRIDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 37078/2014 Between: D. Krishnaiah, and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. KARRI MURALI KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. V T M PRASAD 2. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP) 3. J JANAKIRAMI REDDY The Court made the following Order: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief: “…..to issue an appropriate Writ more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in conducting the auction of lease hold rights of the agricultural lands belonging to Sri Chenna Kesava Swamy Temple, Sri Anjaneya Swamy Temple, Sri Eswara Swamy Temple, and Sri Viswanatha Swamy Temple, 2 situated at Thellapuri Village, Gospadu Mandal, Kurnool District and in due protection of the temples properties from the Respondents 6, 7 and third parties as unconstitutional, unjustified, unreasonable, arbitrary, unlawful and unsustainable….” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners herein are devotees of group of four temples situated at Thellapuri village, Gospadu Mandal. The three temples namely Sri Chennakesava Swamy Temple, Sri Eswara Swamy Temple and Sri Viswanatha Temple have agricultural lands totalling of Ac.33.87 cents. While so, on 09.10.2014, under the provisions of Right to Information Act, the 1st petitioner requested the 4th respondent to furnish the details of the present Managing Trustees and Chairman of all these four Temples, the details of Agricultural Lands possessed and owned by these Temples, the particulars of lease holders right from the year 2001 and the lease amounts, the particulars of defaults, if committed by anybody in payment of lease amounts and also as to whether the leases granted in favour of third parties are approved by the higher authorities. The 4th respondent through letter L.Dis.No.A2/6236/2014-Adm, dated 15.10.2014 informed that the Non-hereditary Trustees appointed to the Temple for a period of two years through proceedings Rc.No.A2/2982/04, dated 25.08.2004 expired on 06.09.2006. After expiry of the period, the Government has not constituted any fresh Trust Board to these temples from the year 2006 onwards. Therefore there is no Trust Board to the Temples from the last 8 years. The 4th respondent also informed that he does not have any information about the 3 particulars of leases of the temple lands right from the year 2001 onwards. Taking advantage of the inaction of the respondents in protection of the Temples Lands, some unscrupulous persons are trying to grab the temple lands. The Ex-Chairman of the Trust Board, whose term expired long back on 06.09.2006 is giving the temple lands on lease for his personal unlawful gains. The 7th respondent filed O.S.No.153/2014 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Allagadda against the Group Temples for Permanent Injunction in respect of two items of properties totalling to Ac.11.36 cents shown in the suit schedule. The 6th respondent was shown as the Chairman of the said Temples. The 7th respondent who filed the suit is none other than the own brother of the 6th respondent. The 7th respondent claimed in the suit as if the 6th respondent gave the lands to him on lease basis for a period of three years commencing from 2013 to 2016. It is said that as if the 6th respondent is continuing as the Chairman of the Trust Board and that he is entitled to continue as such as the new Trust Board is not constituted. A vague allegation is made by the 7th respondent herein against the 6th respondent that the 6th respondent is taking action for conducting auction of lease hold rights on the suit schedule properties. Even though the lease granted to him subsisting and that therefore the 6th respondent has to be restrained from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the lands or conduction any auction of the lease hold rights of the lands in any manner. The suit was filed on 09.07.2014 and the same was decreed ex-parte on 28.08.2014 as the 6th respondent did not 4 enter appearance. Therefore the 6th respondent obtained the decree and the 6th respondent in collusion with 7th respondent allowed the passing of the ex-parte decree affecting the interest of the temples. Therefore the respondents 6 and 7 have played fraud on the temples as well as the Court. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed. 3. The 2nd respondent filed counter affidavit denying the allegations made in the writ petition and stated that the lands of Sri Chennakesava Swamy Temple are being auctioned regularly since 1994 by the trust board constituted according to the procedure. Sri Eswara Swamy Temple does not have any property in Survey No.179/1. There are compromise orders in the year 1971 with regard to lands of Sri Eswara Swamy Temple, Thellapuri village and accordingly they are being under grant to Archakas of the temple, who are doing Kainkaryam of Deities. Hence, these lands are not auctioned by way of public auction as they are earmarked for the service of Deities. It is further stated that Sri Viswanatha Temple, Thellapuri village is not published under the provisions of the Endowments Act and that the said temple and its properties are under private management. The Departmental Officials are not conducing public auction for leasehold rights of properties of Sri Viswanatha Temple. The temples are under the endowment department and being managed and protected as per the procedure established by law. It is further stated that the 2nd respondent is not aware of filing of the suit in 5 O.S.No.153/2014 or decree passed in favour of 6th respondent. The 2nd respondent is not aware of the transactions between the 6th respondent and 7th respondent in respect of the lands of the temple. The petitioners could have impleaded themselves as parties in O.S.No.153/2014 by setting aside the ex-parte decree as they are proclaiming to have full knowledge of these proceedings and also proclaiming to have interest in the Deities. But not taking such action before the trial court, the petitioners filed this writ petition. It is further stated that with regard to properties of Sri Chennakesava Swamy Temple, Thellapuri village, auction is conducted by the 5th respondent, rather than by the trust board, regularly ever since 2018. The auction is conducted by giving public notice through various public offices, by distributing pamphlets widely and it is also informed to the Police offices as and when required by the 5th respondent. Hence, the respondents No.1 to 5 are making best endeavours to see that the Devasthanams are being managed properly by best practices. Therefore, prays to dismiss the writ petition. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.P.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments, for the respondent Nos.1 to 4. 5. On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners while reiterating the contents urged in the writ petition, submits that, on 14.07.2014 the petitioner along with 15 others submitted representation to the 2nd respondent 6 bringing out the various irregularities that are committed by the 6th respondent claiming that he is the Chairman of Trust Board. But the 2nd respondent has not taken any action on the representation so far. A statutory and sacred public duty is created on respondents 1 to 5 to protect all the Temples Lands and endowed properties. The intention of the creditors of the endowments and donors of properties cannot be defeated with this lethargic attitude. The respondents 1 to 5 are expected legitimately to act in accordance with law to protect the temple properties. Being custodians of the temple properties, they have every duty and responsibility to protect the properties of the temples and constitute the Trust Board. The action of the respondents 1 to 5 in not protecting the temple lands is illegal and arbitrary. Therefore, learned counsel requests this Court to pass appropriate orders. 6. Per Contra, learned Assistant Government Pleader while reiterating the contents made in the counter affidavit, submits that, the respondent 1 to 5 are protecting temple lands and more particularly the lands that are mentioned as Sri Chennakesava Swamy temple and Sri Eswara Swamy Temple, Thellapuri village. For avoiding the irregularities, the auction in respect of lands of Sri Chennakesava Swamy Temple are done by the endowment department itself avoiding the trust board for best management. The auction is conducted in most democratic way with a pious intention of giving best resources to the Deities and Devasthanams. He further submits 7 that no right of petitioners is being infringed. Hence, there is no cause of action arose to the petitioners to file the present writ petition by invoke Article 226 of Constitution of India. He further submits that the prayer that auction may be conducted for the lands that belong to Deities as mentioned in this petition is infructuous as auctions are being conducted regularly by the 5th respondent with regard to lands of Sri Chennakesava Swamy Temple. The Eswara Swamy Temple properties mentioned in the petition are given to the Archakas and Sri Viswanatha Temple is not under publication of Endowments department. Hence, the petitioners have no locus standi and prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 7. Perused the record. 8. On a perusal of the material on record, this Court observed that, the temples are under the encroachment department and being managed and protected as per the procedure established by law. Further, the 5th respondent is conducting auctions by giving public notice through various public offices, by distributing pamphlets with regard to the properties of Sri Chennakesava Swamy temple regularly since 2018 and Sri Viswanatha temple is not under publication of Endowments Department. 9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and on considering the submissions of both the learned counsels and upon perusing 8 the entire material on record, this Court found no merit in the instant writ petition and devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed. 10. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. 11. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ Dr. K. MANMADHA RAO, J Date : 07-03-2025 BMS