APHC010691442010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT PETITION NO: 2932 of 2010 Bench Sr.No:-37 [3552] G.S.R. Varada Charyulu, ...Petitioner Vs. Govt. of A.P., rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Endowments IV) Department and Others. ...Respondent(s) ********** Advocate for Petitioner: Mr.VIVEKANANDA VIRUPAKSHA Advocate(s) for Respondent(s): Mr.KAPPERA KOTESWARA RAO SC for Endowments, AP Region., GP FOR ENDOWMENTS CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN DATE : 20th December 2025 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Challa Gunaranjan) This writ petition is instituted by the petitioner in public interest challenging the action of 3rd respondent Sri Laxmi Narasimha Swamy Varla Devasthanam, Mangalagiri (“the Temple”) in interfering with customary religious practice of performance of Tadiyaradhana (Annadanam) with religious fervour, especially during four days of Brahmostavams and other markable days and further trying to dispossess 6th respondent from the house, where such Tadiyaradhana being performed, to be illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and 2 HCJ & CGR, J. W.P.No.2932 of 2010 consequently, to direct 3rd respondent Temple not to take forceable possession of the said house property from 6th respondent enabling them to continue the usual practice of Tadiyaradhana. 2. Petitioner stated to be belonging to Srivaishnava Brahmin of Thengalai cult, living in the town of Mangalagiri. Their family belongs to orthodox Srivaishnava community founded by Sri Bhagwat Ramanuja, follower of Vishisthadvaitha philosophy. The said community is stated to be having specific recognized customary usages and religious practices, as propagated by Sri Ramanuja. He stated to be living by professing Pourohityam and performing religious ceremonies among Srivaishnava community. 3. The case set up by him in the writ petition was that, couple by name Sri Nandyala Narasimha Charyulu and Smt.Nandyala Narayanamma, who were disciples of Lord Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy at Mangalagiri, during their lifetime not only donated valuable items of silver and gold jewellery to the deity and also constructed Gali Gopuram at the temple and prepared Vahanams with their expenses, but also executed registered Will bearing document No.16/1958, dated 02.12.1958, creating Nandyala Narayanamma Sri Vyshnava Ramanuja Kutami (for short, “the Trust”). Under the said Will, it is stated that land admeasuring Ac.6.18 cents in D.No.286/A and Ac.1.00 cents in 3 HCJ & CGR, J. W.P.No.2932 of 2010 D.No.287 of Budampadu village area, Guntur Sub-Division Taluka, Guntur District, house property vide Door No.1-548 (old D.No.358) at Mangalagiri, which was popularly known as ‘Simhala Meda’ came to be endowed for the Trust and one property admeasuring Ac.2.00 cents in was bequeathed to Sri G.Venkata Raja Charyulu, who was brought up by the said couple as they did not had any children. In the said Will, even the constitution of the Trust was also clearly specified to consist three permanent trustees viz., respondents 4 and 5 herein and Sri G.Venkata Raja Charyulu. The object of Trust was that from out of the income earned from the agricultural lands and also some of the debts those were supposed to be recovered, the intention was to perform Tadiyaradhana during four days of Brahmostavams and other marked days. Initially, though the rituals under the Trust were carried on for some time, later, the trustees stated to have given go by to the same and rather tried to manage the affairs in contravention to the objects endowed. On the death of Sri G.Venkata Raja Charyulu, his son i.e. , 6th respondent herein, who was also living in Simhala Meda, where the ritual was being performed, was made as permanent trustee along with independent trustees i.e, respondents 4 and 5. Subsequently, the trustees have executed gift settlement deed, dated 29.04.2009, in favour of the 3rd respondent Temple with respect to the house property and also alienated the agricultural land through registered sale deeds, 4 HCJ & CGR, J. W.P.No.2932 of 2010 dated 12.09.2009 and 13.09.2009 to third parties. In view of these developments, the 6th respondent, who has been living in the house, has been sought to be dispossessed and the 3rd respondent Temple has completely abandoned the ritual and practice of performance of Tadiyaradhana, which was the main object for which the Trust came to be created. Questioning the said action, the present writ petition is preferred. 4. 3rd respondent filed elaborate counter-affidavit, inter alia, stating that the couple Sri Nandyala Narasimha Charyulu and Smt.Nandyala Narayanamma were devotees of Lord Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy of Mangalagiri, and that during their lifetime, they had contributed for the development of temple and also supported performance of various rituals and in that process, when the Trust came forward to execute registered gift with respect to the house property viz., Simhala Meda, the same was accepted. Even the request to continue the aims of founder by conducting Tadiyaradhana was also accepted. It is also stated that as the 6th respondent had made complaint to the Government with respect to taking over of aforesaid asset, where the ritual was performed, the Government had issued order, dated 23.01.2010, not to take over the said institution for time being and remarks were called for in the matter for taking further action. In view of the same, the Temple could not perform Tadiyaradhana during the 5 HCJ & CGR, J. W.P.No.2932 of 2010 days of Brahmostavam at Simhala Meda, however, the Temple conducted said ritual in the main premises. The Temple, therefore, is determined to honour the wish of Smt.Nandyala Narayanamma, for which, the property has been given. 5. Even, respondents 4 and 5 also field detailed counter-affidavit, inter alia, setting out the manner in which the Trust came to be created and how the aforesaid assets were managed for the purpose of performing Tadiyaradhana. It is stated that as respondents 4 and 5 have progressed in age and were unable to discharge their duties effectively in furtherance to the object of the Trust, considering the fact that the propounder of Will and the Trust being devotee of Lord Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy, the house property was gifted in favour of 3rd respondent Temple with a request to continue the rituals and support the object for which the Trust came to be created. It is also stated that not only the property under the gift deed, but also some amount, which was deposited separately in fixed deposits for the purpose of carrying out repairs and renovations and continuing Tadiyaradhana, has also been made over to the Temple. The 6th respondent do not have any right as such to reside in the house and no such right has been created under the Will, even otherwise, he has his own house on the rear side of the said Simhala Meda. Therefore, the question of illegal dispossession does not arise. It is also stated that the Temple has been 6 HCJ & CGR, J. W.P.No.2932 of 2010 making all efforts to continue the ritual of Tadiyaradhana, and the same would be taken forward forever as propounded under the Will and Trust. 6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Vivekananda Virupaksha and learned Government Pleader for Endowments and Sri Koppera Koteswara Rao, learned counsel, appearing for the respondents. 7. On examination of the documents and considering the respective pleas and contentions of the learned counsels, it is evident that the propounder of Will viz., Smt.Nandyala Narayanamma, who executed registered Will, dated 02.12.1958, under Registered Document No.16/1958, intended to create trust over her properties, in particular, the agricultural land at Budampadu Village and residential house called Simhala Meda at Mangalagiri, adjacent to the 3rd respondent Temple, with the object of undertaking Tadiyaradhana on special occasions including that of Brahmostavams. The said ritual was supposed to be funded by the income that would be generated from the agricultural property and to be performed at Simhala Meda. The Trust was created with three permanent members i.e., respondents 4 and 5 and her brought-up son Sri G.Venkata Raja Charyulu. The Trust appears to have discharged the stated objects smoothly for some time. Sri G.Venkata Raja Charyuylu passed away. Eventually and in his place 7 HCJ & CGR, J. W.P.No.2932 of 2010 his son i.e., 6th respondent has been inducted as permanent trustee. Later, certain disputes arose amongst the members of the Trust and that has resulted in creation of a new Trust viz., Nandyala Narayanamma Ramanuja Kutami on 05.08.2004, consisting of nine persons belonging to Sri Vaishnavas cult, which also consisted the 6th respondent herein. In that view of the matter, in order to protect the assets of the original Trust and as the respondents 4 and 5 by that time sufficiently progressed in their age, they executed register gift deed in favour of the 3rd respondent. The same was with a view to not only protect the properties of the Trust and avoid misuse in the hands of others, but also to continue the ritual of Tadiyaradhana, which was the fulcrum object of creation of Trust. The new Trust later even went to the extent of attempting to cancel said gift deed and also addressed letters to the Government for intervention to restrain the 3rd respondent Temple from taking over the Trust. The Government, after having examined the claim, has taken decision to take over the subject property in favour of the 3rd respondent Temple, the new Trust even challenged the same in W.P.No.31056 of 2010, wherein, interim orders came to be passed staying all further proceedings those issued by the Government. The 6th respondent had also filed Suit in O.S.No.144 of 2010 challenging the execution of gift deed in favour of the 3rd respondent Temple. 8 HCJ & CGR, J. W.P.No.2932 of 2010 Subsequently, the 6th respondent withdrew aforesaid Suit, as not pressed and so also the writ petition. 8. In view of the said developments, though in the present writ petition the very execution of gift also has been challenged, we are of the opinion, firstly, that this Court cannot get into the said issue and decide the validity or otherwise of the gift deed, which only a competent civil Court is empowered to do so; and secondly, that even otherwise, as the Suit preferred by the 6th respondent challenging the gift deed since has been withdrawn, it is no longer open for petitioner much less to canvass the said issue. 9. Be that as it may, the subject properties are now vested with the 3rd respondent Temple, which are being managed. In the counter- affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent Temple, it has been specifically stated that the Temple has accepted the gift with the obligation of continuing the ritual and practice of performing Tadiyaradhana and for a short period, the same could not be performed due to the Government’s intervention during the transition period. Learned counsel for the 3rd respondent Temple, however, now, states that the Simhala Meda (now called as Ramanuja Kutami) since has become very old and was in dilapidated condition, the same had to be demolished. Therefore, though the 3rd respondent Temple continues to perform Tadiyaradhana, 9 HCJ & CGR, J. W.P.No.2932 of 2010 the same is performed at main Temple rather than in the house, where it was originally intended to be done. At any rate, since the propounder’s intention was mainly to perform Tadiyaradhana, we are of the opinion that, in view of the subsequent developments and march of time, her will and wish is to be respected and preserved by continuing the said custom and practice at the Temple’s main premises during Brahmostavams and other important days. 10. The respondents 4 and 5 in their counter-affidavit have specifically pleaded that as the Trust was not in a position to realise the leases on time from the lessees of the agricultural lands at Budampadu and considering that the Simhala Meda by the time structurally deteriorated and required immediate repairs and renovation, a decision was taken to alienate the agricultural lands and accordingly, sold the same. The sale proceeds realized thereof have been placed in fixed deposit in a nationalised bank in the name of the 3rd respondent Temple. Rs.25.00 Lakhs have been made as one fixed deposit for the purpose of carrying out renovation and repairs and Rs.5.00 Lakhs have been made as another fixed deposit for the purpose of performing Tadiyaradhana. 11. The 3rd respondent Temple has not denied aforesaid fact of making fixed deposits from out of the sale proceeds of the Trust besides executing the registered gift deed in respect of the house property. 10 HCJ & CGR, J. W.P.No.2932 of 2010 12. We are of the opinion that since the very object of creating Trust was to undertake and continue the rituals of Tadiyaradhana on the auspicious days of Brahmostavams and other important marked days and inasmuch as now the properties of the Trust i.e., house besides the sale proceeds of the agricultural land have been gifted to the 3rd respondent Temple with a specific obligation under the gift deed that the 3rd respondent Temple should continue to honour the object under the Trust in performing Tadiyaradhana, the 3rd respondent, therefore, is legally and even otherwise morally obligated to continue the said ritual. Though an amount of Rs.25.00 Lakhs has been made into fixed deposit for the purpose of undertaking repairs and renovation of the existing building i.e., Simhala Meda, since it is now stated that the building has been demolished as it has become completely dilapidated, the Temple can utilise the said open plot for any of its usages. Therefore, even the amount of Rs.25.00 Lakhs that has been earmarked for the renovation alongwith Rs.5.00 Lakhs, which has been set apart for performing Tadiyaradhana, along with accrued interest as on today, if not otherwise expended, should be specifically kept apart and continue in the fixed deposit. The 3rd respondent Temple shall utilise the interest accrued hence forth on aforesaid amount to meet the expenditure for discharging the obligation of performing Tadiyaradhana on the auspicious days of Brahmostavams and also on birth anniversaries of late Nandyala 11 HCJ & CGR, J. W.P.No.2932 of 2010 Narasimhacharyulu and late Nandyala Narayanamma. It is needless to say that the 3rd respondent Temple shall take necessary steps for creating advance awareness amongst the disciples of Lord Sri Lakshminarasimha Swamy including Srivaishnava Vadagalai group, to participate in the ritual of Tadiyaradhana on the specific days to be announced in advance on every year. 13. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending in this case, if any, shall stand closed. DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J cs