APHC010524832025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT APPEAL NO: 1061 of 2025 Bench Sr.No:-26 [3483] Nagam Veera Venkata Satyanarayana ...Appellant Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondents ********** Advocate for appellant : Sri M. V. S. Nikhil Kashyap representing Sri D. V. Sasidhar Advocate for respondents : Learned Government Pleader for Endowments CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI DATE : 26th September 2025 P C : The present Writ Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 09.09.2025 passed in W.P.No.19266 of 2025 (vide common order in W.P.Nos.21411 and 19266 of 2025) 2. The petitioners in W.P.No.21411 of 2025 were the existing tenants who expressed grievance before the learned single Judge that they were prevented from participating in the auction conducted by respondent No.5 in the writ petition - Sri Samstanam Choultry, represented by its Executive Officer, Pitapuram Town and Mandal, Kakinada District, for grant of leasehold rights in respect of the subject property. 2 3. The petitioners claim that they have been the cultivating tenants of the subject property for the last three years and they may be permitted to participate in the auction process so that the leasehold rights could further be obtained. Their grievance was that the auction notification was not issued in time. 4. The appellant, who was the petitioner in connected writ petition bearing No.19266 of 2025, also had made a representation for conducting the auction similarly. The grievance of the petitioner was that the rules as envisaged under the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Lease of Agricultural Lands Rules, 2003 (for short, “the Rules”), as notified by G.O.Ms.No.379, Revenue (Endo.I) dated 11.03.2003, which requires issuance of notice at least three months prior to the expiry of the lease period, had not been followed. In the instant case, it is alleged that the lease had expired at the end of April, 2025. However, the auction notice was issued on 09.07.2025 and proposed to conduct the auction from 14.07.2025 to 19.07.2025. 5. The writ petition was allowed by the learned single Judge holding that the time period prescribed by the Rules envisaged at least three months period prior to the expiry of the lease was mandatory inasmuch as it was envisaged to facilitate the existing tenant to harvest the existing crop, if any, before the new tenant comes forward for taking possession and to deliver the vacant and peaceful possession to such tenant. It appears that fresh auction notice has been issued by the respondents for grant of leasehold rights. 3 6. Learned counsel for the appellant in the instant case is aggrieved of the judgment and order impugned to a limited extent that it directs the petitioner not to cultivate the subject lands till the conclusion of the auction proceedings proposed by the respondents. 7. It is stated that the appellant in the instant case has already sown his crops and that he, in the normal course, should be permitted to harvest the same till such time as the auction proceedings are concluded and the leasehold rights granted in favour of the new tenant. 8. Be that as it may, we modify the judgment and order impugned to the limited extent that the appellant shall be permitted to harvest his crops, which have been sown in the lands which have been leased out to him, on or before 06.10.2025 when the auction proceedings are stated to be completed. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ RAVI CHEEMALAPATI, J AMD 4 28 HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT APPEAL NO: 1061 of 2025 Dt:26.09.2025 AMD