Telangana High Court
WP/24875/2008 of Sri Arya Vysya Sangham, Ponnur, Guntur District, Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, on 24 December 2008
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 24875 of 2008 Between: Sri Arya Vysya Sangham, Ponnur, Guntur District, rep. by its
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT
PRESENTTHE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINIWRIT PETITION NO : 24875 of 2008
Between: Sri Arya Vysya Sangham, Ponnur, Guntur District, rep. by its Secretary,Sri Ch.Veeranjaneyulu S/o. Venkata Subba Rao R/o. Ponnur, GunturDistrict.
..... PETITIONER
AND
1 The Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Guntur.
2 The Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Guntur.
3 Sri Karumuri Prakash S/o.Venkateswarlu Ponnur, Guntur District. Ponnur, Guntur District.
.....RESPONDENT(S)
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that inthe circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will bepleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly a writ in thenature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the impugnedproceedings issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments passedin Rc.No.A7/7614/08, dated 14.10.2008 directing the petitioner herein tohand over complete charge of Sri Vasavi Kanyaka ParameswariAmmavari Temple, Ponnur to Sri K.Prakash as illegal, arbitrary, oppose tolaw and in gross violation of principles of natural justice and the petitionerherein prays that the same may be quashed.
Counsel for the Petitioner : MR .M.VIDYASAGAR
Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR ENDOWMENTS
The Court made the following :
THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI
WRIT PETITION NO.24875 OF 2008
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER :
The petitioner herein is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 for the purpose of maintaining Sri KanyakaParameswari Temple, Ponnur. This writ petition is filed in the name of thesociety represented by Sri Ch.Veeranjaneyulu, describing himself asSecretary of the Society, seeking a declaration that the order passed bythe 1[st] respondent dated 14.10.2008 directing Sri Ch. Veeranjaneyulu and other members of the Trust Board of the Temple to hand over themanagement of the temple as well as the records and movable andimmovable properties to the 3[rd] respondent herein is arbitrary and illegal.
It is not in dispute that the members of the Trust Board of SriKanyaka Parameswari Temple, Ponnur, earlier filed W.P.No.18050 of1999 seeking a declaration that the religious and charitable institutionsestablished by a person belonging to a particular denomination areentitled for the benefit under Article 26 of the Constitution of India and theprovisions of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short, ‘the Act’) cannot be applied to the saidinstitutions. The said writ petition was disposed of by a Division Bench ofthis Court along with similar other writ petitions by order dated28.12.2001 leaving it open to the petitioners therein to approach theDeputy Commissioner seeking either rescindment of the orders ofregistration or to get the declaration that those institutions were meant forthe benefit of particular religious denominations. Thereafter O.A.Nos.27& 30 of 2002 have been preferred and the same are pending before theDeputy Commissioner of Endowments.
Having regard to the pendency of the said proceedings thepetitioner herein contends that the impugned proceedings directinghanding over the records as well as the movable and immovableproperties of the temple to the 3[rd] respondent is arbitrary and illegal.
I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perusedthe material on record.
In the counter-affidavits filed on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 & 3,the fact that the petitioner society was registered in the year 1974 has notbeen disputed. However, it is stated that Sri Ch. Veeranjaneyulu who deposed to the present writ petition describing him as Secretary of
the society in question was only one of the trustees appointed in the year1994 and the term of the said Trust Board expired long back andthereafter though a Fit person was appointed under the provisions of theAct the petitioner and other trustees did not hand over the records. Subsequently, vide G.O.Ms.No.1572, dated 24.10.2006 andG.O.Ms.No.1098, dated 11.09.2008 the temple as well as the choultryand Annadana Satram managed by Arya Vysa Community wereexempted from the operation of Sections 15 and 29 of the Act. Pursuantthereto, a General Body Meeting was held on 28.09.2008 in which the 3[rd]respondent herein was unanimously elected as Chairman apart fromeight other members. Thereafter, the newly elected managing committeegave a representation dated 1.10.2008 to the Deputy Commissioner ofEndowments requesting to pass appropriate orders for handing over themanagement of the temple to the newly elected committee. Accordingly,the impugned proceedings have been issued.
It is also pleaded by the 3[rd] respondent that pursuant to theimpugned proceedings though two notices dated 22.10.2008 and01.11.2008 by registered post were issued to the deponent Ch.Veeranjaneyulu, they were returned unserved. Hence the notices werepasted on the door of the house of the petitioner and thereafter newlyelected committee took charge of management and possession of themovable and immovable properties on 03.11.2008.
The contents of the said counter-affidavit have been substantiatedby the counter-affidavit filed by the 1[st] respondent – DeputyCommissioner of Endowments.
As could be seen from the material placed before this Court, thetemple in question has been exempted form the operation of Sections 15and 29 of the Act. Admittedly, the petitioner herein along with four others was appointed as trustees of the said temple under the provisions of theAct much prior to G.O.Ms.No.1572, dated 24.10.2006 andG.O.Ms.No.1098, dated 11.09.2008. Even the term of the said Trust Boardexpired long back. At any rate once the temple in question has beenexempted from the operation of Sections 15 & 29 of the Act, the petitioner and other trustees cannot claim any right to manage the temple affairs.Hence, a new committee has been rightly elected. The fact that thedeponent Sri Ch. Veeranjaneyulu did not contest the elections is also notin dispute.
In the circumstances, the mere fact that O.A.Nos.27 & 30 of 2002 arepending before the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments is of noconsequence and on that ground the impugned proceedings cannot beheld to be bad.
For the aforesaid reasons, the impugned order which does not sufferfrom any infirmity warrants no interference by this Court. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.
Dt. 24.12.2008 gbs
_____________G.ROHINI, J.