APHC010700862025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 35987 OF 2025 Between: 1. MAKKENA RAMDAS, S/O. VENKATA SUBBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O. GURUJEPALLI VILLAGE, SANTHAMAGALURU MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT. A.P ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 522237 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS, ENDOWMENTS OFFICE, GOLLAPUDI, AT VIJAYAWADA.ANDHRA PRADESH. -521225 3. THE ASST COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS, BAPATLA, BAPATLA DIST.ANDHRA PRADESH. 522101 4. THE INSPECTOR, ENDOWMENTS DEPORTMENT, AT ADDANKI, BAPATLA DIST ANDHRA PRADESH.523201 5. THE TEHSILDAR, SANTHAMAGULURU MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT. ANDHRA PRADESH. 523302 6. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, SANTHAMAGULURUPOLICE STATION, BAPATLA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 523302 ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: Dr CHALLA SRINIVASA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): GP FOR HOME GP FOR REVENUE GP FOR ENDOWMENTS 2 The Court made the following order: Heard Sri Dr. Challa Srinivasa Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for the respondents. With the consent of both the learned counsel, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. 2. The instant writ petition is filed challenging the action for the 4th respondent in attempting to dispossess the petitioner from the land in an extent of Ac.3.85 cents in R.S.No.75/1 (old R.S.No.58) of Gurijepalli Village, Santhamaguluru Mandal, Bapatla District. 3. It is contended that the petitioner’s mother had purchased the subject property by way of a registered sale deed dated 02.05.1994 bearing document No.1242 of 1994. After the demise of the petitioner’s mother, it had devolved upon the petitioner. However, his name was not mutated in the revenue records. 4. It is further contended that the petitioner’s mother also did not take any steps for mutation of her name in the revenue records. As the neighboring land owners were dumping the quarry waste in to the subject land damaging the crop, the petitioner had approached Tahsildar for appropriate action against the said neighbors. Then, the petitioner had come to know that his name was not recorded in the revenue records. Thus, the petitioner had requested the Tahsildar for effecting necessary mutation and issuance of pattadar pass books. Further, the petitioner had also filed the writ petition before this Court in W.P.No.31367 of 2025 seeking a direction to the 3 respondents to issue pattadar pass books in respect of the subject land. The said writ petition was disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file an application before the competent authority. Upon filing of the same, the competent authority was directed to dispose of the same within three months. 5. It is contended that the Revenue Department without any manner of right claiming the subject land on the premise that the same would belong to the Endowment Department as the same is shown in the name of Sri Sitarama Swamy Vari Devasthanam. The petitioner contends that when he had asked for the details of the Registration of the Temple and the details of property belonging to the Temple under RTI Act, they have informed that no property register is being maintained in respect of the subject Temple. However, the respondent Nos.2 to 6 have been repeatedly threatening the petitioner and trying to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property without authority of law. Thus, the instant writ petition is filed. 6. In the said regard, it is contended that the said Temple is not recognized Temple nor it has any register containing the details of the properties owned by it. The petitioner contends that even in the revenue records that the subject land is shown as private patta land. Having regard to the same, it is contended that the respondents cannot interfere with the possession of the petitioner’s property. 7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for the respondents has placed before the Court a copy of the written instructions received from the District Endowments Officer, Endowments Department, 4 Bapatla. A perusal of the same would reflect that, as per the old adangal, the land in Sy.No.75/1 is in the name of the temple, whereas the Tahsildar showed the said land as patta land in the present report. It further reflects that the members of the Committee of Sri Sitarama Swamy Temple, Gurijepalli, submitted a representation dated 24.03.2025 to the Executive Officer, stating that the land of Ac.3.85 cents in Sy.No.75/1, Gurijepalli, has been in the possession of Sri Sitarama Swamy Temple, Gurijepalli, for the past 90 years. The said land was donated by the late Challa Ramadasu and his wife Rathamma, who died issueless, to the above temple, but they did not hand over the document to anybody and that the said committee had also submitted the copies of the old adangal showing the land in the temple's name. 8. Considered the submissions. 9. If the respondents are of the view that the petitioner’s possession over the subject property is unauthorized and that the property belongs to the Endowments Department, the respondents shall follow due process of law, for eviction of the unauthorized occupants and without following such due procedure, they shall not dispossess the petitioner from the subject property. 10. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed. No order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date: 24.12.2025 BSK 5 03 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 35987 OF 2025 Date: 24.12.2025 BSK