APHC010626182025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 33041 OF 2025 Between: 1. ABDUL GULJAR, S/O ABDUL RAZAK, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O SEELAMVARI STREET, NEAR RANGANAYAKA SWAMY DEVASTANAM, ROBERTSON PET, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, A.P SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE HONBLE ENDOWMENT TRIBUNAL, ANDHRA PRADESH, PEDHAKAKANI, GUNTUR REP BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4. SRI RANGANAYAKA SWAMY TEMPLE, ROBERTSON PET, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: Vinodin Ruth Madapalli Counsel for the Respondent(S): GP for Endowments Pulipati Radhika The Court made the following order: Heard Ms. Vinodin Ruth Madapalli, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for 2 respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Smt. Pulipati Radhika, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.4. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 4th respondent has unauthorizedly disconnected the power supply connection in respect of the subject property, despite the pendency of the application filed by the petitioner in I.A.No.2269 & 2268 of 2025 in O.A.No.61 of 2023 before the Andhra Pradesh Endowments Tribunal, seeking to set-aside of the ex-parte judgment and decree dated 21.04.2025. 3. It is contended that the petitioner’s grandfather had been in occupation of the subject property and had been doing petty businesses, after his lifetime the petitioner continued the said business while in occupation and possession of the said properties. 4. The 4th respondent-Temple gave a notice to the petitioner for eviction of the petitioner from the subject property; to the said notice, the petitioner has submitted his reply. However, the respondents have approached the Endowments Tribunal seeking eviction of the petitioner from the subject property. The Tribunal vide judgment and decree dated 21.04.2025 directed the petitioner to vacate from the subject premises. 5. It is contended that the petitioner was not aware of the said order passed by the Tribunal, till such time, that the respondents have sought to execute the judgement and decree, by disconnecting the power supply. 3 6. The 4th respondent filed counter-affidavit. Smt Pulipati Radhika the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent No.4 would argue that pursuant to the judgment and decree of the Tribunal, the 4th respondent has taken possession of the subject property on 01.08.2025 by dispossessing the petitioner. 7. Having regard to the contentions advanced, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that since the applications filed by the petitioner seeking set-aside of the ex-parte order are pending for consideration, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the Endowments Tribunal to consider and dispose of the I.As. filed by the petitioner seeking to set-aside the ex-parte decree/judgment dated 21.04.2025 in I.A.Nos.2268 and 2269 of 2025, as expeditiously as possible and in any event not later than six weeks from the date of receipt of this order. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous application pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date: 04.12.2025 BSK 4 12 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 33041 OF 2025 Date: 04.12.2025 BSK