Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/12894/2012 of Mr. P. Punna Rao Vs State of Andhra Pradesh , 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: 12894/2012 Between: Mr. P. Punna Rao ...PETITIONER AND State
APHC010006422012
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: 12894/2012
Between:
Mr. P. Punna Rao ...PETITIONER
AND
State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.PONNADA SREE VYAS
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.SUNDARI R PISUPATI
2.RATHANGA PANI REDDY K (STANDING COUNSEL FOR TIRUMALA TIRUPATI DEVASTHANAMS)TIRUPATI DEVASTHANAMS)
3.B.V.KRISHNA REDDY(STANDING COUNSIL FOR TTD)
4.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS
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, seeking the following relief:
“….. to issue an order direction or writ more so in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the actions of the respondents in seeking to alter change and destroy the pillars of the 1000 Pillar Mandapam situated at Bhoogarbham dam and Narayanagiri Garden of Tirumala Hill as arbitrary illegal and highhanded without jurisdiction and voilative of Articles 14, 21, 26 and 27 of the actions of the respondents in seeking to alter change and destroy the pillars of the 1000 Pillar Mandapam situated at Bhoogarbham dam and Narayanagiri Garden of Tirumala Hill as arbitrary illegal and highhanded without jurisdiction and voilative of Articles 14, 21, 26 and 27 of the Constitution of India apart from voilative of the provisions of the Ancient Monuments Act and consequently direct the respondent to protect and preserve the pillars by photographing and cataloging the said pillars thereupon to utilize the pillars in incorporating them into the new mandapam being constructed in the place of 1000 Pillar Mandapam without altering them and to store all such other pillars which are not being used in a safe and secure location until using the same and pass....”
2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner herein is a practicing Advocate. The present writ petition is filed complaining against the vandalization and wanton destruction of ancient sculptured pillars which are lying on the hills. When the petitioner was at Tirumala on 22.4.2012 and happened to visit the Boogarbham dam area, he saw several stone pillars dumped there and some were being cut. It is stated that in the year 2004, the 2[nd] respondent had got demolished 1000 Pillar Mandapam which is outside the temple compound for the purpose of implementing a master plan. In the process of this demolition, the top of the 1000 Pillar Mandapam was removed and all the pillars of the Mandapam were shifted to Bhoogarbham dam area and Narayanagiri Garden on Tirumala hill itself. As the pillars would now need to be incorporated into the new Mandapam, the 2[nd] respondent is taking steps to alter the pillars according to its whims and fancies and incorporate the altered pillars into the new Mandapam, to alter and destroy these pillars in the name of incorporating desecration of the ancient religious and cultural heritage. This desecration of the pillars squarely violates his fundamental rights under the constitution of India apart from being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, as the respondents are seeking to move in an arbitrary and highhanded manner in these matters, as much as the pillars are being altered and destroyed for no reason except the arbitrary decision of the respondents to change them and to incorporate them into the new mandapam. Hence, the present writ petition.
3. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents No.2 and 3. While denying the allegations made in the petition, stated that, there is no truth in any of the averments of the petitioner and the dismantled stone pillars are stacked neatly at various places in Tirumala and the same will be utilized for further requirement. The existing structures like Upapeetham, Pillars, Podial, Uttara Beam and Vyalam Beam are used in the proposed Stone Mandapam work. The left over structures are preserved and stacked. It is further stated that the dismantled 1000 Pillars Mandapam stone structures are stacked at N.G Garden area and G.G Dam area in systematic way to be utilized in the proposed construction in front of Srivari Temple with some of the available parts of the 1000 Pillar Mandapam to give a look at ancient glory. The existing stone pillars, i.e., chitrakanta Sthambham and Anvotti Pillars are proposed to be used in the proposed stone Mandapam. As per plan approved for the proposed stone Mandapam, the stone pillars required of 11’ – 9’ height. The suitable sizes were identified. The same are to be kept on the RCC pedestals flat surface. During execution, the existing pillars are to be chamfered smoothly at bottom and top, if necessary, as per the site conditions. It is further stated that the pillars which have been stored at N.G. Garden are stacked long back, one adjacent to one without damage. Due to natural calamitic conditions, the vegetation is growing. However, the same will be removed periodically. As the creepers and grass are small in height, it will not damage the stone pillars. The required number of existing stone pillars will be used in the proposed stone Mandapam without altering or changing the pillars of the 1000 pillar Mandapam. It is further stated that the pillars of the 1000 pillar Mandapam will be re-used to the proposed stone Mandapam in as is where is condition and without disturbing the features and sculptures. In view of the above submissions, there are no merits in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
4. Heard Sri Ponnada Sreevyas, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Endowments and Sri K. Rathangapani Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TTD appearing for the respondents.
5. On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents made in the petition, contended that, the actions of the respondents would also be violative of the provisions of the Ancient Monuments Act, inasmuch as the respondents who are only entrusted with the custody of these ancient structure and pillars cannot misuse their entrustment and alter or destroy the said pillars. He submits that the pillars need to be preserved. For this purpose, the pillars need to be documented by photographing the same to record the features and sculptures on these pillars. It is only after creating these records that the respondents can be allowed to incorporate the pillars in the new mandapam. He submits that these pillars would have to be incorporated in their existing shape and they cannot be altered to suit the whims and fancies of the respondents. He submits that, unless this Hon’ble Court interdicts these respondents, there is every danger of the pillars being altered and destroyed and such alteration and destruction would gravely and irreparably affect the rights and interests of the petitioner. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner requests this Court to pass appropriate orders.
6. Per contra, learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents opposed for allowing the writ petition. Whereas, learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 and 3 while reiterating the contents made in the counter affidavit, submits that, the pillars of the 1000 pillar Mandapam will be re-used to the proposed stone Mandapam in as is where is condition and without disturbing the features and sculptures. He submits that photographing of the same will be taken up for record before execution so as to incorporate the pillars in the new Mandapam in the same position. He submits that the stone upapeetham work is only in progress. Due uneven level and rough finish at the bottom and sides of the Peetham, it will be levelled and to maintain lessor joints and to place on the concrete beam to maintain uniform top level, necessary dressings are to be carried out, for which the existing designs are not at all disturbed and there are no designs on the bottom and top faces. Therefore, in view of the above, it is crystal clear that there is no cause of action for the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the submissions made by both the learned counsels, this Court is of the opinion that, the cause of action in this writ petition pertains to the year 2012
and as stated by respondents counsel that the pillars of 1000 pillar Mandapam will be re-sued to the proposed stone Mandapam without disturbing the features and sculptures. Therefore, this Court deems fit to dispose of the writ petition while directing the respondents to use the pillars of 1000 Pillar Mandapam to the proposed stone mandapam without disturbing the features and sculptures.
8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
__________________________
DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J.
Date : -12-2024
Gvl
Gvl
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION No: 12894 of 2012
Date : 31.12.2024