Telangana High Court
WP/27875/2005 of Veeramallu Panduranga Vitthal, Vs Government of A.P., Endowments Department, on 29 December 2005
SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.27875 OF 2005 Dated: 29-12-2005 Between Veeramallu Panduranga Vitthal, S/o. Chinna Mahalakshmanudu, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Vandurru Village, Mudhinepalli Mandal, Krishna District. …PETITIONER AND Government of A.P. Endowments Department Rep.
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH
WRIT PETITION No.27875 OF 2005
Dated: 29-12-2005
Between
Veeramallu Panduranga Vitthal,S/o. Chinna Mahalakshmanudu,Occ: Agriculture, R/o. VandurruVillage, Mudhinepalli Mandal,Krishna District.
…PETITIONER
AND
Government of A.P. Endowments DepartmentRep. by Assistant Commissioner of Endowments,Lane opposite Old Bus Stand, Vijayawada andOthers.
…RESPONDENTS
ORDER:
Petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the second respondent templein issuing the notice dated 20.12.2005 and proposing to conduct the auction of lease holdrights for Ac.11.11 cents in R.S.No.18 situate in Vanuduru Village, Mudinepalli Mandal,Krishna District as illegal and arbitrary.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was the lessee in respect ofthe above-mentioned land from 2004 and he has been cultivating the said land by payingthe stipulated maktha regularly. While so, the second respondent issued a notice dated13.05.2005 calling upon the petitioner to pay the maktha of 55 bags and hand over thepossession of the land to the temple.
Page 1 of 2
The petitioner approached the first respondent and submitted a representation dated21.05.2005 requesting him to extend the lease period by two more years. The learnedcounsel further submits that when the second respondent issued a notice dated 04.07.2005for auction of the lease hold rights of the said lands, the petitioner filed WP.No.15076 of2005, where in this Court directed the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner till27.09.2005 and it was also observed that it is open for the respondents to take appropriateaction after the expiry of the lease period of the petitioner. The learned counsel furthersubmits that the second respondent has issued the open auction notice dated 20.12.2005for leasehold rights of the said lands in question for a period of three years, which isimpugned in this writ petition.
This Court is of the opinion that all leases in respect of the endowed/temple standscancelled by virtue of Section 82 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu ReligiousInstitutions and Endowments Act, 1987. Therefore, the petitioner has no vested or legal rightto question the auction notice.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. However, if the petitioner desires to participate inthe auction, he can as well participate in the open auction and bid in respect of thecultivating rights of the lands in question.
______________
V. ESWARAIAH, J
Page 2 of 2
Loading citations and judicial treatment…