APHC010107602026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT APPEAL NO: 426 of 2026 Bench Sr.No:-12 [3552] Tanneeru Mallikarjuna and others ...Appellants Vs. Tanikonda Venkateswararao and others ...Respondents ********** Advocate for Appellants : Mr MVS Nikhil Kashyap representing Mr D V Sasidhar Advocate(s) for Respondent(s): Mr Naga Praveen Vankayalapati, GP for Endowments, Ms Devi Subhashini Anne [SC For Endowments]. CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN DATE : 17th April, 2026 P C : We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. It appears that based on the statement made by learned counsel for respondent No.4 in the writ petition namely Sri Ankamma and Nancharamma Temples that land to an extent of Ac.1.52 cents was allotted to the said respondent for using the same for purposes of conducting festival ceremonies and that the said land to that extent had not been disturbed by the 2 HCJ & CGR, J WA_426_2026 proposed construction of the shops, the learned single Judge proceeded to issue directions against respondent No.4 prohibiting it from raising construction of buildings or shops of any permanent character over the said land measuring Ac.1.52 cents. It appears that the temple authorities had already raised some construction in the shape of shops and invited bids and made allotments in favour of the appellants herein. 3. The apprehension of the appellants today is that the statement made by the counsel for respondent No.4 as was reflected in the affidavit filed by it was not correct inasmuch as what was allotted to the temple was not an area of Ac.1.52 cents but only Ac.0.66 cents and that the construction was raised on a parcel of land which fell beyond Ac.0.66 cents of allotted land. 4. The apprehension as we understand and which is entertained by the counsel for the appellants is that the allotments made in regard to shops would ultimately be cancelled and the shops would be liable to be demolished in case this particular fact was not understood in the correct perspective and the statement erroneously made by counsel for respondent No.4 was not rectified. 5. Our attention has been drawn to proceedings, dated 23.11.1998, issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kandukur, whereby land measuring 3 HCJ & CGR, J WA_426_2026 Ac.0.66 cents falling under Sy.No.865/1A1A2A was ordered to be entered in the relevant register to reserve the same for organizing celebrations and functions of Ankamma temple as per Board Standing Order 15 and in particular paragraph 4 thereof. 6. Despite the apprehension expressed by the appellants, the stand of the temple authorities today before us still is that no construction was in fact being raised on Ac.0.66 cents which was allotted by the Revenue Divisional Officer for a specific purpose vide its proceedings, dated 23.11.1998, and that construction was in fact raised on land other than Ac.0.66 cents so allotted. It was also stated that the temple authorities never intended to say that what was allotted by the Revenue Divisional Officer was in fact Ac.1.52 cents. 7. The stand taken by the temple authorities in fact contradicts the earlier stand taken before the learned single Judge. 8. We deem it apposite that appropriate remedy be availed by way of a review before the learned single Judge in this regard to project the correct perspective. At this stage, we do not intend to interfere and pass any orders and leave the parties free to avail their appropriate remedies. 9. The Writ Appeal is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. 4 HCJ & CGR, J WA_426_2026 Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J Vjl