‘>5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVA (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUA TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 6461 OF 2016 Between: 1. Chamana Ramesh, S/o. Hanumantha Rao, Hindu, Male, Age 42, R/o. D.No. 2-146, 0pp. Kapu Ramalayam, Pentapadu Village, Pentapadu Mandal, West Godavari District 2. Chamana Seshu, S/o. Hariudiantha Rao, Hindu, Male, Age 39, R/o. D.No. 2-146, 0pp. Kapu Ramalayam, Pentapadu Village, Pentapadu Mandal, West Godavari District. 3. Chamana Satish, S/o. Harfumantha Rao, Hindu, Male, Age 35, R/o. D.No. 2-146, 0pp. Kapu Ramalayam, Pentapadu Village, Pentapadu Mandal, West Godavari District. ...PETITIONERS AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principle Secretary, Endowments Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2. The Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Department, Eluru, West Godavari District. 3. The Executive Officer, Sri Bala Venkateswara Swamy Temple, Tallamudunurupadu Village, Tadepalligudem Mandal, West Godavari District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 3 may rd respondent in issuing the notice vide No. 24/2016, dated 10.02.2016, thereby directing petitioners to hand over the property and further threatening to dispossess by way of conducting Tender-cum-Auction over the petitioners and their family members property bearing Door No. 10/1/5/5 in total extent of 756 Sq.Yds in R.S.No.45 of Thalamudunurupadu, Tadepalligudem is illegal, irregular, arbitrary and violative of provisions under Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions & Endowments Act 1987 and Rules framed there under and also offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the notice issued by the 3rd respondent vide notice No. 24/16, dated 10.02.2016. I.A. NO: 1 OF 2016fWPMP. NO: 8219 OF 20161 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 respondents not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioners and their family members property bearing Door No. 10/1/5/5 in total extent of 756 Sq.Yds in Thalamudunurupadu, Tadepalligudem by duly suspending the notice dated 10.02.2016 vide notice No. 24/16 issued by 3 disposal of the above writ petition. R.S.No.45 of rd respondent, pending lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Between: The Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Department, Eluru, West Godavari District. ...PETITIONER/2"'' RESPONDENT AND 1. Chamana Ramesh, S/o. Hanumantha Rao, Hindu Male, Age 42, R/o. D.No. 2-146, 0pp. Kapu Ramalayam, Pentapadu Village, Pentapadu Mandal, West Godavari District 2. Chamana Seshu, S/o. Hanumantha Rao, Hindu, Male, Age 39, R/o. D.No. 2-146, 0pp. Kapu Ramalayam, Pentapadu Village, Penlapadu Mandal, West Godavari District. 3. Chamana Satish, S/o. Harfumantha Rao, Hindu, Male, Age 35, R/o. D.No. 2-146, 0pp. Kapu Ramalayam, Pentapadu Village, Pentapadu Mandal, West Godavari District. ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS 4. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principle Secretary, Endowments Department, Secretariat 5. The Executive Officer, Sri Bala Venkateswara Tallamudunurupadu Village, Tadepalligudem Mandal, District. (Respondent Nos.4 & 5 Hyderabad. Swamy Temple, West Godavari are not necessary parties in this petition) ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS praying that in the circumstances m support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim order made in WPMP.No.8219 of 2016 in WP.No.6461 of 2016 dated 29.02.2016 and dismiss the main Writ petition as devoid of merits. Petition under Section 151 'CPC stated in the affidavit filed i Counsel for the Petitioners: Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: Counsel for the Respondent Nb.3: SRI KANDA ENDOWMENTS SRI MANGENA SREE RAMA RAO GP FOR ENDOWMENTS SRINIVASU, SC FOR The Court made the following; ORDER 1 / APHC010745542016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3310] WEDNESDAY ,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 6461/2016 Between: Chamaria Ramesh, and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.MANGENA SREE RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP) 2.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 Indi a for the following relief: “ to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing the notice vide No 24/2016 dated 10.02.2016 thereby directing petitioners to hand over the property and further threatening to dispossess by way of conducting TendercumAuction over the petitioners and their family members property bearing Door No 10/1/5/5 in total extent of 756 Sq Yds in R S No 45 of ThalamudunurupaduTadepalligudem is illegal irregular arbitrary and violative of provisions under Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions Endowments Act 1987 and Rules framed there under and also offends Articles 14 21 and 300A of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the notice issued by the 3rd respondent vide notice No 24/16 dated 1^.02. 2016 and to pass such ” 2. The facts of the case are that the Petitioners herein have purchased an extent of 70 Sq. yards of site in R.S.No. 45 of Tallamudunurupadu, Tadepalligudem on 30-05-2007 from Vanimisetti Bala Tripura Sundari W/o. Akki Raju and her daughter Nunna Jaya Kumari, W/o. Surya Sri Ram for valuable consideration of Rs. 7,02,000/- vide document No. 2701/2007 file Tadeplligudem Sub-Registry. The 1 "‘Petitioner’s wife by name Vani Manga Tayaru also purchased an extent of 218 Sq. yards of site in the same survey on the number for valuable consideration of Rs. 2,18,000/- vide document No. 1328/2007, dt. 15.03.2007 and his elder brother's wife Jyothi Priya purchased an extent of 218 sq. yards of site for valuable consideration of Rs. 2,18,000/- vide registered document, Dt. 15.03.2007 and his younger brother's wife Rama Deepthi purchased an extent of 250 Sq. yards of site in the same survey number for valuable consideration of Rs.2,50,000/- vide document 1327/2007 dt. 15.03.2007. Since from the date of purchase they possession and enjoyment of the above mentioned properties with absolute rights and they have been constructed pucca buildings. They have been regularly paying house taxes to the authorities without any default what so ever and they are also availing the electricity services .from power distribution company. It is further stated that an extent of Ac. 5.88 cents of land in R.S.No. 45 of Tallamudurnurpadu, Tadepalligudem is originally belongs to S.T.V. Narasimhacharyulu and he leased out the entire extent to Sri Lakshmi Sita Ramanjaneya Rice Mill for permanent lease. Subsequently a suit was filed vide O.S.No. 9/32 on the file of Sub-Ordinate Court, Eluru, for dissolution No. are in 3 of the firm by the partners of above said Rice Mill. Receiver was appointed by the court vide I.A.No.681 of 1937 for conducting of auction of the suit properties. In the said auction one Vanimisetti Satyanarayana became highest bidder and a registered sale deed was executed on 11.02.1938 for valuable consideration of Rs. 7666/- vide Document No. 398 of 1938 and the said Vanimisetti Satyanarayana became absolute owner of the property, further stated that a partition was affected on 21.06.1940 and in the above said partition, the above said property was fell to the share of Vanimisetti Satyanarayana and he is absolute owner, possessor and enjoyer of the Subsequently from the legal heirs of the Vanimisetti Satyanarayana Vanimisetti Bala Tripura Sundari, W/o. Akki Raju and her daughter Nunna Jaya Kumari, W/o. Surya Sri Ram, petitioners and their wives purchased above mentioned extents and constructed buildings with their hard moneys. The 3rd Respondent is neither owner of the property nor possessor of the same. But somehow claiming ownership over the property and claiming the maktha from the Petitioners. It is further stated that the 3rd Respondent filed O.A. 213 of 2013 on the file of Andhra Pradesh State Endowments, Tribunal, Hyderabad under Section 83 of Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act 1987 and directed the 1®‘ petitioner to appear before the Camp Court at Kakinada on 6-06-2013. Accordingly, the petitioners were appeared before the Camp Court at Kakinada and also engaged Advocate to contest their case and filed detailed counter. The is pending for adjudication. No final order is passed on the above mentioned It is same. i.e., same 4 O.A.NO. 213 of 2013. Further, the 3^'^Respondent has no locus to file the above numbered OA and the said institution is neither owner of the property. The 3'''^Respondent institution has no right to treat the petitioners encroachers. While pending the above O.A., all of sudden, the 3''^Respondent issued a notice on 10.02.2016 vide Notice No. 24 of 16 under the provisions of the Sec. 82(1) of Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act 1987 and declared that their lease is cancelled with effect from 10.02.2016. It is further informed that they are going to conduct auction by way of Tender cum Public Auction as per rules and directed to handed over the premises within 15 days. Otherwise, threatened to take coercive steps. Questioning the notice issued by the 3'"'^ respondent, the present writ petition has been filed. an 3. This Court vide order dated 29.02.2016 has granted interim direction as prayed for. 4. The counter affidavit has been filed by the 2"^ respondent. While denying the allegations made in the petition, inter alia, contended that this respondent is not aware of filing of O.S.No.9/32 and the partition made on 21.06.1940. Either endowment officials or O^'^respondent temple are not parties to the suit in O.S.No.9/1932. Hence, the judgment in the said suit will not bind on the subject temple. Even if, the same are done prior to Act 30/87 the same will not have effect by virtue of Sec. 160 of Act 30/87 i.e., overriding effect of Act. Further the partition interse between the family members over the property belonging to the 3'"^ respondent temple will not create any rights ts. 5 to the petitioners, hence no rights flow from the said partition. It is further stated that the subject temple has filed O.A.No.213/2013 U/Sec. 83 of Act St 30/87 before the Hon'ble Endowments Tribunal for eviction against 1 petitioner herein, as he is in possession and occupation of property in question as encroacher and the same is pending. Petitioners 2 and 3 herein are no other than own brothers of 1®‘petitioner. A notice to appear in the matter was issued to the petitioner herein, who is respondent in the eviction petition and he has engaged a counsel and contesting the same and not cooperate with the Tribunal for disposal. It is further stated that the petitioners being encroachers of endowed property have no valid right to approach this Hon'ble High Court by invoke Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking extension of mighty hand of the Hon'ble High Court to protect his illegal possession and occupation of subject property of the case. Hence, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Endowments and Sri Kanda Srinivasu, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 6. On hearing, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that, without touching the merits of the case, issue a direction to the Tribunal to dispose of the O.A No.213 of 2013 pending before it. 7. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents does not refute the said submission of learned counsel for the petitioners. 6 8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the considering the submissions of both the learned counsels case and on without touching the merits of the case, directing the A.P. State Endowments Tribunal to dispose of O.A.No.213 of 2013 pending before it, as expeditiously, as possible. Further, the petitioners as well as the respondents are directed to cooperate with the trial for speedy disposal of the said O.A. 9. It is made clear that, till the disposal of the said O.A., the respondents are directed not to take petitioners. any coercive steps against the 10. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, shall stand closed. if any Sd/- M SRiNIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To. 1. The Principle Secretary, Endowments Department Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 2. The Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Godavari District. 3. The Executive Officer, Sri Bala Venkateswara Tallamudunurupadu Village, Tadepalligudem Mandal District. 4. One CC to Sri Mangena Sree Rama Rao 5. One CC to Sri Kanda Srinivasu, SC for Endowments[OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Endowments, High Court 7. Three CD Copies. State of Andhra Guntur District. Department, Eluru, West Swamy Temple, -J, West Godavari Advocate [OPUC] of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] ssb HIGH COURT DATED;29/01/2025 ORDER WP.No.6461 of 2016 CT 5 21 FEB 2025 Current Section . ^ DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS