APHC010323542015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3310] THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 9471/2015 Between: Vedantam Ramanujacharyulu, and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. S SRINIVAS REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP) 2. PULIPATI RADHIKA 3. KANDA SRINIVASU SC FOR ENDOWMENTS (KS AND WG) The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “….to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th Respondent in issuing proceedings in Rc. No.A2/4289/2010 Adm dated 19.03.2015 directing the 2nd Respondent to lease out Ac.26.38 cents of patta land (mistakenly mentioned therein as Ac.34.00 cents) belonging to 2 the Petitioners in Sy. Nos.18/1A1, A2, B, D1, D2, E, G and H of Tallagudem Village, Pedapadu Mandal, West Godavari District, by conducting a public auction, as arbitrary, illegal, unjust, violative of the fundamental and Constitutional rights guaranteed to the Petitioners under the Constitution of India and violative of the principles of natural justice and to consequently set aside the aforesaid proceedings ..… 2. The brief facts of the case of the petitioner are that Ac.39.48 cents of land situated in Tallagudem village, Pedapadu Mandal, West Godavari District is their ancestral property. Out of the said Ac.39.48 cents of land, one of their ancestors, namely late Vedantham Narasimhacharyulu, set apart Ac.13.10 cents of land to their forefathers, who rendered service in the 2nd respondent temple in the capacity of Archakas and others. Their family has been rendering service in the 2nd respondent temple for over a century without any remuneration. Day to day needs of their families is met by the little income that is derived from cultivating the aforesaid land. In fact, pattadar pass books and title deeds have been issued to them in respect of the aforesaid land by the revenue authorities after due enquiry. Their names are also reflected in the pahanis issued by the revenue authorities in respect of the aforesaid land. Suffice it to state that the 2nd respondent has no right whatsoever in the aforesaid land. To their utter shock and surprise, they had recently came to know that the 2nd respondent is taking steps to lease out the aforesaid Ac.26.38 cents of land belonging to them to third parties by conducting a public auction and that they would be dispossessed from the aforesaid land. They approached the Executive Officer of the 2nd respondent temple and enquired about the same. He informed them that the 4th respondent issued 3 proceedings in Rc.No.A2/4289/2010 Adm, dated 19.03.2015, directing him to lease out the aforesaid land by way of public auction before 31.03.2015. It is further stated that the extent of land in the impugned proceedings is mentioned as Ac.34.00 cents instead of Ac.26.38 cents by mistake. In view of the said proceedings, the 2nd respondent is taking hectic steps to dispossess them and conduct auction without following the procedure contemplated under law and without giving any notice to the petitioners. It is further stated that on coming to know about the impugned proceedings, the petitioners made an application to the Assistant Commissioner, under Section 46 of the A.P.Endowment Act, requesting him to supply them with a copy of the Register maintained under Section 43 of the Endowments Act, as the details pertaining to the properties owned by the 2nd respondent would find place in the said register along with other relevant particulars, but the said register is not supplied to them till date. Hence, the present writ petition came to be filed. 3. The counter affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent stating that Sri Alahasingarapaa Swamy Temple, Eluru town and Mandal, West Godavari District is notified under Section 6(c) institution as per the Andhra Pradesh Hindu Religious and Charitable Act of 1987 and the same is under the administrative control of the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, Guntur. The 2nd respondent temple is absolute owner of the land measuring Ac.47.10 cents in different survey numbers and the temple has filed O.A.No.144 of 2001 for eviction of the encroachers. The said O.A. was 4 allowed by order No.245 of 2007, dated 27.09.2007. The entire land measuring Ac.47.10 cents belongs to the temple and the same is entered in the Section 43 Register maintained by the temple, as such, the claim of the petitioners that the land measuring Ac.39.48 cents is their family property as they are in uninterrupted possession of the same cannot be accepted, as the same is not proved by any documentary evidence. It is further stated that mere issuance of pattadar pass books and title deeds in favour of the petitioners does not create right or title over the temple land. It is further stated that if the petitioners have got any grievance, their remedy is only seeking declaration under Section 87 of the Endowments Act 30 of 1987, before the A.P.Endowments Tribunal, which is the competent authority constituted under Section 162 of the Endowments Act 30 of 1987 for deciding any dispute, question or matter relating to a Charitable Institution, Dharmadayam, Religious Charity, Religious Endowments, Religious Institution or any institution as defined in the Act. Further if the petitioners are aggrieved by any entries made in the Section 43 Register maintained by the temple they have to approach the Hon’ble Endowments Tribunal under Section 45 of Act 30 of 1987 challenging the entries made therein. It is further stated that the pattadar pass books are in the name of the petitioners are obtained behind the back of the temple and without any notice to the temple and hence they are not binding on the temple and they are not valid and prayed the Court to dismiss the petition. 5 4. Heard Sri Srinivasa Reddy, learned Senior Counsel, representing Sri M.Karthik Pavan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Endowments and Smt Pulipati Radhika, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 5. On hearing, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, while reiterating the contents made in the petition, submits that, no public auction has been conducted by the 2nd respondent in pursuance of the impugned proceedings till date. In fact, any agricultural land belonging to an endowment has to be leased out in accordance with A.P.Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Lease of Agricultural Lands Rules, 2003 (for shot ‘the Lease Rules’). According to Rule 11 of the Lease Rules, notice of auction should be published at least ten days prior to the date of auction on the notice board of the endowment and by beat of tom tom in the concerned area. But, no such notice has been published by the 2nd respondent till date. He further contends that only with a view to dispossess the petitioners from the aforesaid land and to prejudice their rights and interest over the said land, the impugned proceedings were issued by the 4th respondent. He further submits that, pursuance of the impugned proceedings, the 2nd respondent is taking steps to create third party interests over the said land without following the procedure stipulated under the Lease Rules, only with a view to defeat their rights. 6. Per contra, learned Government Pleader opposed for allowing the writ petition and prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 6 7. Whereas, learned counsel for respondents submits that the second respondent temple is notified under Section 6(c) institution as per the Andhra Pradesh Hindu Religious and Charitable Act of 1987 and the same is under the administrative control of the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, Guntur. The 2nd respondent temple is absolute owner of the said land, if the petitioners have got any grievance, their remedy is only seeking declaration under Section 87 of the Endowments Act 30 of 1987, before the A.P.Endowments Tribunal, which is the competent authority constituted under Section 162 of the Endowments Act 30 of 1987 for deciding any dispute. Further if the petitioners are aggrieved by any entries made in the Section 43 Register maintained by the temple, they have to approach the Hon’ble Endowments Tribunal under Section 45 of Act 30 of 1987 challenging the entries made therein. Therefore, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 8. Perused the material on record. 9. Rule 11 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Lease of Agricultural Lands Rules, 2003 is as follows: Publication of Auction Notice: A copy of the auction notice shall be published in the language of the locality at least 10 days prior to the date fixed for auction, by affixture. i. On the notice board or on the front door of the institution concerned, or in the case of a specific endowment, on the 7 notice board or on the front door of the office of the institution to which the property in question is attached. ii. The contents of the auction notice shall be published, by beat of tom tom in the inhabited area of the Gram Panchayat in which the lands are situate’ and also by distributing pamphlets about the proposed auction. iii. The Executive Authority should ensure adequate publicity for the auction in all appropriate ways. 10. As per the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Lease of Agricultural Lands Rules, 2003, if the respondents are intend to conduct a public auction, the respondents has to give publication and copy of the auction notice shall be published in the language of the locality at least 10 days prior to the date fixed for auction and the contents of the auction notice shall be published by beat of tom tom in the inhabited area of the Gram Panchayat in which the lands are situated and also by distributing pamphlets about the proposed auction and the Executive Authority should ensure adequate publicity for the auction in all appropriate ways. 11. While observing the above Rules, this Court is of the view that the respondents are not followed the procedure prescribed under Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Lease of Agricultural Lands Rules, 2003. Moreover, this Court, at the stage of admission, on 06.04.2015, has granted interim order as “status-quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained by both the parties till then. 8 12. So, in view of the interim orders, it appears that the petitioners having possession till date. 13. Hence, this Court deems fit to allow the present writ petition. The impugned proceedings in Rc.No.A2/4289/2010 Adm, dated 19.03.2015 issued by the 4th respondent are hereby set aside. Further, the respondents are directed to comply with Rule 11 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Lease of Agricultural Lands Rules, 2003 by giving public auction notice at lease ten (10) days prior to the date fixed for auction and further directed to follow due process of law in pursuant to the eviction orders passed in O.A.No.144 of 2001, dated 27.09.2007. Till then, the respondents are directed not to evict the petitioners from the subject land. 14. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J. Date :10.04.2025 sj 9 121 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION No.9471 of 2015 Date :10.04.2025 sj