APHC010397092025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NOs: 20153 & 22147 of 2025 WRIT PETITION NO: 20153/2025 Between: 1. M SREEDHAR BABU, S/O M SREERAMAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O 3-3-68/A, SIR SILK, GUNTUR COLONY, KAGZ NAGAR, ADILABAD, TELANGANA 2. TALASILA PRAMILA RANI,, W/O LATE PALADUGU RAJARAO, R/O D.NO.3-125, PRASANAGARAM, GOVINDARAOPET MANDAL, MULUGU DISTRICT, TELANGANA DISTRICT. 3. KOGANTI SAILAJA,, W/O KOGANTI SAMRAT, R/O 4/90, BESIDE SACHIVALAYA, BILLAPADU KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF ENDOWMENTS, A.P SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS, ANDHRA PRADESH, VIJAYAWADA. 3. SRI PRUDHVISWARA SWAMY DEVASTHANAM, NADAKUDURU VILLAGE, CHALLAPALLI MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. REP.BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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 an order or direction, more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents more particularly the Respondent No.3 herein in issuing the Tender-Cum-Public Auction Notice dated 13.07.2025 by including the private lands of the Petitioners herein admeasuring an extent of Ac.2.00 cents in Sy.No.3-2-B, Ac.4.00 cents in Sy.No.3-2 and Ac.1.55 cents in Sy.No.3-2-C of Elamarru Village, Pedaparupudi Mandal, Krishna District as being illegal. arbitrary and in violation of principles of natural justice and in violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 300-A of the constitution of India and also in violation of A.P Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Lease of Agricultural Lands Rules, 2003 and Consequently set aside the Tender-Cum-Public Auction Notice dated 13.07.2025 issued by the Respondent No.3 and further direct the Respondents not to interfere with the title, possession and enjoyment of the Ac.2.00 cents in Sy.No.3-2-B, Ac.4.00 cents in Sy.No.3-2 and Ac.1.55 cents in Sy.No.3-2-C of Elamarru Village, Pedaparupudi Mandal, Krishna District 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 direct the Respondent Nos.2 & 3 herein not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the Petitioners over lands of the Petitioners herein admeasuring an extent of Ac.2.00 cents in Sy.No.3-2-B, Ac.4.00 cents in Sy.No.3-2 and Ac.1.55 cents in Sy.No.3-2-C of Elamarru Village, Pedaparupudi Mandal, Krishna District, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SITA RAM CHAPARLA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS WRIT PETITION NO: 22147/2025 Between: 1. M. SREEDHAR BABU, , S/O. M. SREERAMAMURTHY, AGED 57 YEARS, OCC- EMPLOYEE, R/O. D.NO. 3-3-68/A, SIR SILK, GUNTUR 3 COLONY, KAGZ NAGAR, ADILABAD, TELANGANA. 2. TALASILA PRAMILA RANI,, W/O. LATE PALADUGU RAJARAO, AGED 62 YEARS, OCC- RETD. EMPLOYEE, GOVINDARAOPET MANDAL R/O. D.NO.3-125, PRASANAGARAM, MULUGU DISTRICT, TELANGANA. 3. KOGANTI SAILAJA,, W/O KOGANTI SAMRAT, AGED 42 YEARS, OCC- HOUSEWIFE, R/O. D. NO. 4/90, BESIDE SACHIVALAYA, BILLAPADU, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS, GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KRISHNA DISTRICT AT MACHILIPATNAM. 4. THE DISTRICT ENDOWMENT OFFICER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 5. SRI PRUDHVISWARA SWAMY DEVASTHANAM, REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, NADAKUDURU VILLAGE, CHALLAPALLI MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 6. AVALA SRINIVAS RAO, S/O. NARASIMHA RAO, AGED 40 YEARS, OCC- CULTIVATION, R/O. SEEPUDI VILLAGE GUDIVADA MANDAL, KRISHNA 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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of Respondents particularly 5th Respondent in conducting auction of leasehold rights on 25.07.2025 and confirmation thereof, pursuant to Tender- cum-Public Auction 4 Notice, dated 13.07.2025 issued by him and consequential action of 5th Respondent and his subordinates in insisting the Petitioners to vacate from their respective lands of Ac.4.00 Cents, Ac. 2.00 Cents and Ac. 1.55 Cents respectively covered by Sy. Nos 3-2-A, 3-2-B and 3-2-C of Elamarru Village, Pedaparupudi Mandal of Krishna District for surrendering the same to 6th Respondent, as illegal, irregular, irrational and voilative of the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowment Act, 1987 and Rules framed thereunder and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300- Aof the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents particularly 5th Respondent and his subordinates not to interfere in any manner with Petitioners peaceful possession over their said lands 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 suspend the operation of Tender-cum- Public Auction dt. 25.07.2025 and confirmation thereof, conducted pursuant to Notice, dated 13.07.2025 issued by the 5*^ Respondent and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with possession of petitioners over their respective lands of Ac.4.00 Cents, Ac. 2.00 Cents and Ac. 1.55 Cents respectively covered by Sy. No’s 3-2-A, 3-2-B and 3-2-C of Elamarru Village, Pedaparupudi Mandal of Krishna District, pending disposal of main writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SITA RAM CHAPARLA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: The grievance of the petitioners is that the respondents have conducted auction of leasehold rights in respect of the subject properties, that belong to the petitioners. 5 2. The petitioners contend that they have purchased the subject property under a registered sale deed/ gift settlement deed etc. In pursuance thereto, the revenue authorities, recognizing their title and possession, have mutated their names in the revenue records and issued pattadar passbooks in their favour. 3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondents cannot conduct auction of leasehold rights in respect of private property. It is further submitted that the impugned auction is contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh (Lease of Agricultural Lands) Rules, 2003, and that the 3rd respondent lacks the jurisdiction to issue such notices. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.19319 of 2025, wherein the Court directed the respondents to exclude the subject property from the proposed auction. Liberty was, however, reserved to the respondents to issue notice in accordance with law, if the possession of the petitioners was found to be unauthorized. The petitioners, in support of their claim, rely upon entries made in passbooks/ gift deed, sale deed. It is further contended that the lands of the present petitioners also fall within the very same survey number, under the same auction notification, the subject lands are also included. He, thus argues that, the petitioners seek a similar direction for exclusion of their lands from the auction proceedings. The learned counsel for the petitioners relies on the following decisions in support of his contentions. 6 i. S. Kumar Vs. Commissioner and others1 ii. Rame Gowda(dead) by Lr’s Vs. M. Varadappa Naidu (Dead) by Lr’s and others2 iii. W.P.No.7788 of 2020, dated 20.03.2020, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. 5. On the other hand, the respondents claim that the petitioners have no right to obstruct the auction proceedings and rely upon the entries in the RSR and submit that the subject lands are Inam land classified as ‘Archaka Inam Service’ and thus the same would belong to the 3rd respondent temple. 6. Learned standing counsel for the respondent no.3, Smt. Pulipati Radhika argues that the subject lands have been duly entered in the register under Section 43 of the Act, and there was never any challenge to such entry. It is further submitted that the auction was conducted in the presence of representative of the petitioner(s), who raised no objection at that stage, and that the successful bidder has already been put in possession of the property. It is also urged that temple lands should be protected, and since the auction was confirmed by the competent authority, the petitioner has not made out any case warranting interference by this Court. In support of her contention 1 (2019) 5 Supreme Court Cases 244 : 2019 SCC Online SC 478 2 (2004) 1 Supreme Court Cases 769 : 2003 SCC Online Sc 1398 7 the learned standing counsel relies on the decision of the apex court in the case of A.A. Gopala Krishnan Vs. Cochin Devaswom Board & Others3. 7. According to the respondents, the successful bidder has been put in possession of the land, whereas the petitioner claims that he is in possession of the land. This court acting under Article 226 of the constitution of India cannot adjudicate on the issue of respective titles of the parties and their respective possession. 8. In a previous writ petition filed by the alleged owners of the land in the same survey number relating to different extent, the same auction notice was questioned. In that case, this Court directed the respondents to exclude the properties involved in the said writ petition from the auction, granting liberty to them to proceed against the petitioners in accordance with law. It appears that for the first time the temple has proposed an auction in respect of the subject land. 9. In view of the foregoing and in terms of the order passed in the earlier writ petition, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition on similar lines. 10. Accordingly, the impugned auction proceedings are set aside in so far as they relate to the subject land of the petitioners. The respondents are, however, at liberty to take appropriate action in 3 Civil Appeal No.3135 of 2007 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 26712 OF 2005)] 8 accordance with law if they find that the possession of the petitioners over the subject lands is without authority of law. 11. With the above observations, the Writ Petitions are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date: 01.09.2025 MSI 9 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NOs: 20153 & 22147 of 2025 Date: 01.09.2025 MSI