APHC010487232025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 25455/2025 Between: 1. SRIKANTHAM CHAKRAVARTHY, S/O SUBRAHMANYA SASTRY AGED ABOUT 41YRS. ARCHAKA R/O H.NO.6-169/1, NEAR RAJARAJESWARI DEVI TEMPLE, MUKTESWARAM-533211. INAVILLI MANDAL. DR BRA KONASEEMA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI-522503.AMARAVATHI. GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA-521225. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, KAKINADA-533001. 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, AMALAPURAM-533201. DR BRA KONASEEMA DISTRICT. 5. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SRI MUKTESWARA AND MULESWARASWAMY VARI DEVASTHANAM THOTTARAMUDI (V) - 533211. AINAVILLI MANDAL. DR BRA KONASEEEMA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be 2 pleased be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction declaring the action of the respondent authorities in interfering with the enjoyment of the terraced G plus 1 house property constructed by the petitioner vide PR No.40 Dt.29-12-2023 constructed in an extent Ac.O.10 cents out of Ac.0.40cents out of full Ac.4.40cents in R.S.No.62/5 of Thottaramudi (v) Ainaviili Mandal, Dr BRA Konaseema District at the active instance of the illegal encroachers of the temple land and persons who are enemical towards as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, unconstitutional and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent No.2 to 5 not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners house property ie., G plus 1 constructed vide vide PR No.40 Dt.29-12-2023 in an extent Ac.O.lOcents out of Ac.0.40cents out of full Ac.4.40cents in R.S.No.62/5 of Thottaramudi (v) Ainaviili Mandal, Dr BRA Konaseema District without following due process and grant such IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 grant interim direction directing the respondents 2 to 5 not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner's house property ie., G+1 constructed vide vide PR No.40 Dt.29-12- 2023 in an extent Ac.0.l0 cents out of Ac.0.40cents out of full Ac.4.40cents in R.S.No.62/5 of Thottaramudi (v) Ainavilli Mandal, Dr BRA Konaseema District without following due process pending disposal of the main writ petition and grant such other just relief or reliefs as this HOn'ble court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interests of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SRINIVASA RAO PAPPU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS 3 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 25455/2025 The Court made the following Order: Heard Sri Srinivasa Rao Pappu, learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.5. 2. The petitioner's grievance is that the respondent authorities are interfering with the possession of his residential house consisting of G+1 floor(s). It is contended that around 40 years ago, for residential purposes of four archakas of the subject temple, a tiled house was constructed. Since the said house has become dilapidated condition, three of the said archakas constructed their own residential houses and moved out of the tiled house, thus the petitioner constructed the subject house in the land earmarked for construction of residential house. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in 1859, one Sistla Govindayya constructed the subject temple(s) and endowed a property of an extent of Ac.23.00 cents. He was the trustee of the temples during his lifetime. The forefathers of the petitioner's family took over the management of the trust and were managing the temple and the archakatvam. However, in 1961, pursuant to a compromise arrangement with the Endowments Department and the Archakas, the Archakas agreed to surrender an extent of 5.69 acres of land to the department out of 13.89 acres that they had enjoyed as service Inam. In addition to the same, an extent of Ac. 0.40 cents of land 4 was earmarked for residential purposes. In which the four archakas have jointly constructed a tiled house and have been residing there for 40 years. The said land in Ac. 0.40 cents was allotted in favour of the Archakas at Ac. 0.10 cents for each of the Archaka. Thus, the petitioner has obtained his extent of Ac. 0.10 cents. It is contended that the petitioner has constructed a new building after borrowing the money from third parties and also after obtaining necessary permission from the Grama Panchayat. Since the income that is fetched from Archakatvam is meagre and is not sufficient for the repayment of the debts that are incurred for construction of the new house, he has let out a portion of the house. The said tenant has put up a shop in the said portion of the house. The tenant is using it as a Godown. It is further contended that since the petitioner and other Archakas have sought the removal of the encroachment over the other agricultural lands of the Temple. The said encroachers have developed a vengeance attitude towards the petitioner, and the remaining Archakas and thus have been causing harassment through the temple authorities. Thus, the respondents have been highly interfering with the possession of the subject lands. Thus, he contends that the building has been constructed after obtaining due permission and on lands allotted for residential purposes of the Archakas and there is no illegality committed while building the residential house. 4. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent temple argues that the subject land is meant for residential use; however, the 5 archakas are using it for commercial purposes without informing the temple authorities. Therefore, the impugned proceedings have been issued. 5. Considered the submissions. If the respondents are of the view that the construction of the subject house is not on accordance with law, they are at liberty proceed in accordance with law, without adherence to the procedure the petitioner’s possession shall not be disturbed. 6. Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: “The respondents are directed to follow the due procedure under law if any action is contemplated against the petitioner for removal of the subject building/dispossession from the subject building.” 7. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date: 19.09.2025 MSI 6 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 25455/2025 Date: 19.09.2025 MSI