APHC010064432026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] MONDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 3646/2026 Between: 1. GOLLAPALLI SRINIVASA RAO, S/O VENKATA RAMANA, MALE, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/OD.NO.16-169, HANUMAN NAGAR, VENKATAPURAM PANCHAYAT, ELURU RURAL MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P. 2. GOLLAPALLI VENKATA RAMANA,, S/O APPANNA, MALE, AGED 65 YEARS. CULTIVATION R/O D.NO.16-169, HANUMAN NAGAR, VENKATAPURAM PANCHAYAT, ELURU RURAL MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT REVENUE-ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT, A.P. 3. THE REGIONAL JOINT COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, KAKINADA, E.G.DISTRICT, A.P. 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT 2 NEAR VASANTHA MAHAL, ELURU, W.G.DISTRICT, A.P. 5. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, VAINATHESWARA SWAMY TEMPLE, PONANGI, ELURU MANDAL, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, C/O 0/0 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, NEAR VASANTHA MAHAL, ELURU, W.G.DISTRICT, A.P. ...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 pleased toleased to pass an order or Writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other writ declaring the action of the respondents Nos.2 to 5 more particularly 5TH respondent-Executive Officer in issuing proceedings, dated 23.01.2026, directing 2ND petitioner to vacate the land within 15 days, i.e., by 10.02.2026, in respect of subject land of Ac.0-42 cents, which is part of fish tank out of total extent of Ac. 1-42 cents, situated in Sy.No.224/1 of Ponangi Village, Eluru Mandal, Eluru District, without giving any opportunity to the petitioners by issuing show cause notice and calling for explanation more so when there is a registered title deed in favour of 2ND petitioner, dated 17.07.2008, bearing document No.4595/2008 and such contemplated eviction without following due process of law as illegal, arbitrary, voilative of principles of natural justice and contrary to the procedure established by law and voilative of Articles -21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents Nos.1 to 5 not to interfere with their possession and enjoyment over the above said land by quashing the impugned proceedings in the interest of Justice and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 Pleased to direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from their fish tank of Ac.0-42 cents, which is part of fish tank out of total extent of Ac. 1- 42 cents, situated in Sy.No.224/1 of Ponangi Village, Eluru Mandal, Eluru District, by suspending the impugned proceedings of 5TH respondent, dated 23.01.2026, pending disposal of main Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 3 1. C VENKAIAH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following: 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION No.3646 OF 2026 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “ to pass an order or Writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other writ declaring the action of the respondents Nos.2 to 5 more particularly 5th respondent- Executive Officer in issuing proceedings, dated 23.01.2026 directing 2nd petitioner to vacate the land within 15 days i.e., by 10.02.2026 in respect of subject land of Ac.0.42 cents which is part of fish tank out of total extent of Ac.1.42 cents, situated in Sy.No.224/1 of Ponangi Village, Eluru Mandal, Eluru District without giving any opportunity to the petitioners by issuing show cause notice and calling for explanation more so when there is a registered title deed in favour of 2nd petitioner dated 17.07.2008 bearing document No.4595/2008 and such contemplated eviction without following due process of law as illegal, arbitrary, voilative of principles of natural justice and contrary to the procedure established by law and voilative of Articles 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents Nos.1 to 5 not to interfere with their possession and enjoyment over the above said land by quashing the impugned proceedings in the interest of Justice and pass such other order or orders...” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 3. The case of the petitioners herein is that the petitioner No.2 is the absolute owner and possessor of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.1.42 cents in Sy.No.224/1 and Ac.0.98 cents in R.S.No.224/2 total admeasuring Ac.2.40 cents situated at Ponangi Village, Eluru Mandal, West 5 Godavari District, having acquired the same through registered sale deed in the year, 2008 from his vendor, who in turn purchased the part of the property in the year, 1995. While so, the respondent No.5 issued a statutory notice dated 05.01.2026 under Section 83(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable And Hindu Religious Institutions And Endowments Act, 1987 (in short ‘Act No.30 of 1987’) calling for explanation from the petitioner No.2, why they cannot be evicted from the subject land since the subject land was notified under Section 43 of the Act 30 of 1987. For which, the petitioner No.2 herein submitted a detailed explanation to the respondent No.5. Without considering the same, respondent No.5 passed impugned notice/ proceedings dated 23.01.2026 which was assailed in the present writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner No.2 acquired the subject property through a registered sale deed in the year, 2008. Since then, he has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property in Sy.Nos. 224/1 and 224/2. Therefore, without considering the rights of the petitioners, who acquired the subject property through a registered sale deed and without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner No.2 in true sense, the respondent No.5 is trying to evict the petitioner No.2 from the subject land by way of summary proceedings and also issued an impugned speaking order dated 23.01.2026 without assigning appropriate reasons is illegal, arbitrary and colourable exercise of power on part of respodnents. Hence, the writ petition. 6 5. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.5 submits that the extent of land for determination of the rights of the petitioners as well as temple is only Ac.0.42 cents in Sy.No.224/1, but not Ac.1.42 cents as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners. The show cause notice dated 05.01.2026 as well as speaking order dated 23.01.2026 specifically mentioned in respect of Ac.0.42 cents in Sy.No.224/1 only. It is further submitted that the speaking order passed by respondent No.5 is an appellable order under Section 83(6) of the Act 30 of 1987. Therefore, without availing effective statutory alternative remedy, the petitioners approached this Court invoking extraordinary jurisdiction, which is contrary to the settled principle of law that is principle of alternative remedy. 6. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the both the parties and perused the material on record. As per Section 83(6) of the Act 30 of 1987, the petitioner is available with an effective statutory alternative remedy for adjudication of disputes between the petitioner as well as the respondent No.5 herein. Further, once a statutory appellate authority, much less, a quasi judicial authority was established for resolution of the disputes between the parties, it is settled law that the petitioners shall invoke right of filing an Appeal before the appellate tribunal/ authority to get rid of their grievances, if any. 7 7. In view of the foregoing discussion, the petitioners are hereby directed to institute appropriate proceedings before the appellate tribunal, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till filing of such appeal and interlocutory application, if any along with the original petition, the order of “status quo” obtaining as on today shall be maintained by the respondents in respect of Ac.0.42 cents in Sy.No.224/1 situated at Ponangi Village, Eluru Mandal, West Godavari District. 8. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J Date:09.02.2026 BSP 8 06 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO.3646 OF 2026 Date:09.02.2026 BSP