APHC010441232025 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 NO: 22405/2025 Between: 1. P PRADYUMNA KUMAR, S/O KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O D. NO 11/148, SANTHAPETA. OPPOSITE B.ED. COLLEGE,NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (ENDOWMENTS) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P, 2. THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT 4. SRI VENKATAMMA PERANTLAMMA TEMPLE, RANGANAYAKULPET, NELLORE CITY, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER ...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 a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing proceedings in L.Dis No.M2/COE-19023(32)74/2023 dated 11.07.2025 in 2 vetoing the auction conducted by the 4th respondent on 05.06.2025 for license holdrights of lands measuring Ac. 0.64 cents and Ac. 0.60 cents in Sy.No.107 of Manumasiddi Nagar, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District as per the auction notification dated 21.05.2025 as bad, illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, unreasoned and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same and direct the 2nd respondent to approve auction conducted on 05.06.2025 and pass such other order or orders, in the interest of justice. 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 4th respondent to permit the petitioner for the lease hold rights of lands measuring Ac. 0.64 cents and Ac. 0.60 cents in Sy.No.107 of Manumasiddi Nagar, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District as per the auction notification dated 21.05.2025 held 05.06.2025 by suspending the operation of the impugned proceedings issued by the 2nd respondent in L.Dis No. M2/COE-19023(32)74/2023 dated 11.07.2025 and Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. D V SASIDHAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS 2. DEVI SUBHASHINI ANNE SC For Endowments The Court made the following: ORDER: Heard Sri D.V. Sasidhar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Smt. Devi Subhashini Anne, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.4. 2. The grievance of the writ petitioner is against the proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 11.07.2025. 3 3. The petitioner contends that he participated in the auction conducted by respondent No.4-Temple for leasehold rights in respect of the subject land, covering an extent of 1.24 acres in Sy.No.107, Manumasiddi Nagar, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District, and was the highest bidder. The respondent No.4 vide proceedings, dated 11.06.2025, has submitted a report to the respondent No.3 stating that the bid of the petitioner is quite reasonable, having regard to the nature of the subject land, and has requested the granting of approval for the granting of a lease in favour of the petitioner for a period of Eleven (11) years. In pursuance thereto, the respondent No.2 has passed the impugned proceedings whereby he vetoed the proposal of the lease to be granted in favour of the petitioner, stating that the bid amount offered by the petitioner is relatively low. Hence the Writ Petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would urge that in terms of the provisions of Rule 12(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Immovable Properties and Other Right (Other than Agricultural Lands) Leases and Licenses Rules, 2003, the competent authority either has to approve the lease proposals or reject it and he has no power veto the same. If the authority has contemplated to reject the lease, the same should be by way of a reasoned order. In the present case, no such reasoned order has been passed by authority. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 has placed before the court a copy of instructions 4 received by him in the case. A perusal of the same would reflect that the respondent No.2 has after examining the proposals for approval, it is noticed that the bid amount in the public auction is relatively low and hence the same was vetoed. It is further stated that the Commissioner, Endowments Department has the authority to approve or reject the same and the decision was taken to reject the highest bid, having regard to the potentiality of the land with reference to locality. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits as per the provisions of Rule 12(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Immovable Properties and Other Right (Other than Agricultural Lands) Leases and Licenses Rules, 2003, which reflects that if the value of lease is between Rs.2.00 Lakhs to Rs.5.00 Lakhs, the Additional Commissioner, Endowments Department is the appropriate authority either to reject or accept the lease proposals, whereas in the present case, the impugned proceedings have emanated from the office of the respondent No.2 who is not the appropriate authority to pass the impugned proceedings. 7. Having regard to the same, this Court deems it appropriate to set aside the same and remit the matter to the respondent No.3 to place the subject file before the appropriate authority/Additional Commissioner having jurisdiction to approve or reject the lease. Upon such submission, the appropriate authority/Additional Commissioner of the Endowments Department shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 5 8. This Court suo-moto impleads the Additional Commissioner, Endowments Department, as the party respondent to this Writ Petition. The registry is directed to make necessary amendments to the cause title 9. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is 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 6 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 22405/2025 Date: 01.09.2025 MSI