Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/15371/2018 of V KRISHNAMA CHARYULU Vs STATE OF AP on 31 December 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3310] TUESDAY , THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 15371/2018 Between: V Krishnama Charyulu ...PETITIONER AND
APHC010333932018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3310]
TUESDAY ,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 15371/2018
Between:
V Krishnama Charyulu ...PETITIONER
AND
State Of Ap and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.K V L NARASIMHA RAO
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP)
2.A SREEKANTH REDDY(SC FOR ENDOW RS)
The Court made the following:
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 :
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:
“….to issue an appropriate Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 5th respondent in trying to put the service inam lands for lease in the auction situated in Sy No 180 and Sy No 115/B of Y T Cheruvu Village Guntakal Mandal, Anantapuramu District without considering petitioners representations dated 18012016 and 04.12.2017 as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory contrary to law and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to allot a share all along with other archakas and to hand over the such share to the petitioner out of the service inam lands situated in Sy No 180 and Sy No 115/B of Y.T. Cheruvu Village, Guntakal Mandal, Anantapuramu District, and pass…” 5th respondent in trying to put the service inam lands for lease in the auction situated in Sy No 180 and Sy No 115/B of Y T Cheruvu Village Guntakal Mandal, Anantapuramu District without considering petitioners representations dated 18012016 and 04.12.2017 as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory contrary to law and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to allot a share all along with other archakas and to hand over the such share to the petitioner out of the service inam lands situated in Sy No 180 and Sy No 115/B of Y.T. Cheruvu Village, Guntakal Mandal, Anantapuramu District, and pass…”
2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner himself and other archakas have been rendering services as Archakatvam to Sri Venkata Ramana Swamy temple and Sri Anjaneya Swamy temple, which are situated in Y.T.Cheruvu, since more than four centuries. The above said temples are claimed to be founded by Petitioner’s great-grandfathers and living mainly doing service to respective gods for time immemorial. The said temples are having service Inam lands in an extent of Ac.60.15 cents in Sy.No.180 and Sy.No.115/B, situated at Y.T.Cheruvu Village, Guntakal Mandal, Anantapuramu District which are being managed by Petitioner’s family for generations who are rendering their services towards Dhoopa Deepa Naivedyam and yearly Uthsavams in the subject temples. Subsequently, due to raising disputes among the family members regarding the Inam land, the 4[th] and 5[th] respondents divided the land among Petitioner’s brothers Rajagopala Charyulu and Jaya Prakash to an extent of Ac.11-45 cents in Sy.No.180, an extent of Ac.08-55 cents in Sy.No.115/B was allotted to V. Kala Chandra and V. Satyanarayana and an extent of Ac.05-00 in Sy.No.115/B cents was allotted to paternal uncle V. Srinivasa Charyulu and the rest of the lands were taken over by the 4th and 5th Respondents excluding the Petitioner and other family members. It is stated that the2[nd] respondent has issued proceedings vide Rc.No.12/63873/2001, dated 04-12-2001, requesting the Regional Commissioner as well as the Respondents 3 to 5 herein, till the scales are extended and cadre strength is fixed, the
lands come under Section 6 (a) and (b) of the Act, the Archakas should not be disturbed from their respective service inam lands. Aggrieved by the same, the Petitioner has submitted representations dated18-01-2016 and 04-12-2017 requesting his share in the land, but the respondents’ authorities instead of considering the representations and to the utter surprise, without having any right, proclaimed on 03-01-2018, by way of beat of tom tom in the village that they are going to auction the Inam lands on 05-01-2018, for lease. Since the lands are purely service Inam lands which are meant for the livelihood of family (Archaka’s), the Endowment Department has no right whatsoever it may be to take the possession of the said lands. The said auction was adjourned by the respondents without fixing any date for the reasons best known to them. However, there is a possibility of conducting the lease auction of the subject property by the respondent authorities on any date. Questioning the same, the present writ petition came to be filed.
3. Counter affidavit has been filed by the 5[th] respondent. While denying all the allegations made in the petition, inter alia, contended that, the petitioner is questioning the compromise that took place in the year 1994, he has to explain as to what he was doing all these years. It came to notice of the present Respondent that the Writ Petition has worked as a constable in the police department and retired from service and presently settled in Hyderabad. After retirement from Government service, he cannot claim any share on the lands owned by the temple. He cannot question the right of the temple in taking possession of the lands and conducting auction. It is further stated that the compromise of temple lands in between Archakas and temples were made in the year 1994. The said compromise has taken place in the presence of the Inspector, Endowments Department, Uravakonda, village elders and in the presence of 5 archakas who have affixed their signatures on the statement. The circular instructions issued by the second respondent instructing all the Regional Joint Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner and Assistant Commissioner not disturb the Archakas from the temple lands who are in possession and enjoyment in lieu of Archakatvam service until scales are extended to Archakas and cadre strength of the temples are fixed. The said circular instructions are scrupulously followed by the present Respondent and hence they are allowed to enjoy their share of land. It is further stated that, if the petitioner is the part of archaka family, he has to sought out his remedies with other members of the family and not against the temple that to after a lapse of nearly 25 years. In view of the above reasons, this respondent prayed to dismiss the writ petition.
4. Heard Sri K.V.L. Narasimha Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for the respondents.
5. On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents made in the petition, submits that, Petitioner is an entitled family member who has been serving the temples for a long time. He submits that the Respondent authority i.e., Endowment Department did not consider the representations made by the Petitioner before deciding to auction the land and the said action of the Respondents is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law and violation of the principles of natural justice. Therefore, learned counsel appearing for the petition requests this court to pass appropriate orders.
6. Per contra, learned Government Pleader has also while reiterating the contents made in the counter affidavit, submits that, the temple lands were periodically auctioned every three years and the subsisting tenancy expires in the year 2019. The Writ Petitioner has conveniently chosen auction date just for the sake of filing the present Writ Petition. He submits that the Petitioner being a retired government employee, question of depriving his livelihood does not arise. Therefore, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.
7. On a perusal of the material on record, it is observed that, it is true that the petition and other persons were performed their duties to the subject temples as Archaks, as such they are entitled to equal share on par with petitioner’s brothers over the service Inam property. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has approached the respondent authorities several times by way of representations to allot a share to him but instead of considering those representations, the respondents, without having any right proclaimed on 03.01.2018 by way of beat of tom tom in the village and they are going to auction the Inam lands on 5.01.2018. But they have not conducted any auction.
8. Moreover, it is the contention of the respondents that the temple lands were periodically auctioned every three years and the subsisting tenancy expires in the year 2019. Further, the petitioner being a retired government employee, the question of depriving his livelihood does not arise.
9. In view of the foregoing discussion and on hearing the submissions of both the learned counsels, this Court found no merit in the instant writ petition, devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed.
10. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.
_________________________
DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J.
Date : -12-2024
Gvl
Gvl
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITON No.15371 of 2018
Date : 31.12.2024