1 APHC010447802015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3310] FRIDAY ,THE THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 21003/2015 Between: J. Rami Reddy, ...PETITIONER AND Sri Satyanarayana Swamy Temple and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M VIDYASAGAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP) 2. A SREEKANTH REDDY(SC FOR ENDOW RS) The Court made the following: ORDER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief: “…..declaring the action of the 1st respondent i.e., Executive Officer, Nandikotkur Group Temples, Sri Satyanarayana Swamy Temple, Sangameswaram Village, Kothapally Mandal, Kurnool District, contemplating to hold public auction of the lands admeasuring an extent of Acs.5.27 cents in Sy.No.10-A and an extent of Acs.2.58 cents in Sy.No.10-B situated in 2 Tatipadu Village, Joopadu Bunglow Mandal, on 10.07.2015 as bad, illegal, arbitrary, opposed to law in violation of principles of natural justice and pass such other order or orders…..” 2. None appeared for the petitioner. 3. Heard learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments, appearing for the respondents 2 to 4. 4. This Court vide order dated 09.07.2015 has granted interim order, which reads as under: “There shall be interim direction, as prayed for. The auction may go on, but the proceedings of the auction shall not be finalized. If the petitioner is in possession, his possession shall not be disturbed until further orders.” 5. The 1st respondent filed counter. While denying the contents of the writ petition, he stated that, in view of the interim orders passed by this Court, no person came forward to participate in the public auction, as such, the same was not conducted as per the schedule. Further stated that the petitioner is squatting over the temple lands by paying a very meager amount of Rs.25,905/- for the total extent of land and if the subject lands are put for auction, it will fetch more than Rs.10,000/- per acre. Hence sought for dismissal of the writ petition. 6. Perused the record. 7. In view of the interim order passed by this Court and in view of the submissions of both learned counsel, it appears that the public auction for the 3 subject lands was not conducted and the petitioner has been in possession of the said property till date. In fact, the lease period has already been expired. Hence, nothing survives in this writ petition for further adjudication. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. However, the respondent authorities are at liberty to take steps for conducting fresh auction with regard to subject property by following due process of law. Till then, the respondent authorities are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. 9. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stands closed. _________________________ DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J. Date: 03.01.2025 ARR 4 HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO Writ Petition No.21003 of 2015 Date: 03.01.2025 ARR