WP/23268/2012 of Sri Borramma Ammavari Temple, Vs The Commissioner of Appeals, on 29 December 2023

1. The Commissioner of Appeals, Office of the Chief Commissioner ofLand Administration, A.P., Hyderabad.Land Administration, A.P., Hyderabad.

2. The Joint Collector, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam

4. The Tahsildar, Gajuwaka Mandal, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam[District.]

5. The Special Deputy Tahsildar(lnams), Visakhapatnam, VisakhapatnamDistrict.District.

6. Sri Sirumala Manikyam, W/o. Late Rajana Raju

7. Sri Srimalla Eswaramma, W/o. Seshu Prakash

8. Smt. Sreemanthula Lakshmi, D/o. Sankara Rao

9. Sri Sreemanthula Eswara Rao, S/o. Sankara Rao

10. Sri Sreemanthula Sambasiva, S/o. Sankara Rao 11 .Sri Koneti Apparao, S/o. Late Veeraswamy

12. Kum. Koneti Lakshmi, D/o. Appa Rao

13. Kum. Koneti Ganeswari, D/o. Appa Rao

/

F

(

14. Sri Koneti Veeralingam, S/o. Appa Rao,

15. Sreemantula Sankara Rao, S/o. Late Pydikonda, D.No.31-10-419 , KBCTowers, S-4 Kurmannapalem, Gajuwaka Mandal, VisakhapatnamDistrict.Towers, S-4 Kurmannapalem, Gajuwaka Mandal, VisakhapatnamDistrict.

GPA holder of Respondents 6 to 14

16. Dulla Ramu Nayudu, S/o. Veeranna, Hindu, male Aged 52 Years, R/o.D.No.6-6, Yedumetia Marripalem, Aganampudi, Parawada Mandal,Visakahapatnam District.D.No.6-6, Yedumetia Marripalem, Aganampudi, Parawada Mandal,Visakahapatnam District.

17. Dulla Ramana, S/o. Dulla Appala Naidu, Hindu, male[R/o.]

D.No.6-6, Yedumetia Marripalem, Aganampudi, Parawada Mandal,Visakahapatnam District.Visakahapatnam District.

18. Dulla Appa Rao, S/o. Veeranna, Hindu, male R/o.D.No.6-6,[Yedumetia]Marripalem, Aganampudi, Parawada Mandal, VisakahapatnamDistrict.Marripalem, Aganampudi, Parawada Mandal, VisakahapatnamDistrict.

19. Seethini Ramaswamy, S/o. Appala Naidu, Hindu, Male, R/o.D.No.6-6,Yedumetia Marripalem, Aganampudi, Parawada Mandal,Visakahapatnam District.Yedumetia Marripalem, Aganampudi, Parawada Mandal,Visakahapatnam District.

20. Kunchi Satya Rao, S/o. Kunchi Boraiah, Hindu, Male, R/o.D.No.6-6,Yedumetia Marripalem, Aganampudi, Parawada Mandal,Visakahapatnam District.Yedumetia Marripalem, Aganampudi, Parawada Mandal,Visakahapatnam District.

(RR 16 to 20 are impleaded as per Court Order dated.22/09/2014[in]WPMP No.23196/2014)WPMP No.23196/2014)

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that inthe circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court maybe pleased to issue an appropriate Writ order or direction more particularly,one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus,-declaring the proceedings in CCLA'sProgs.No.VI /54/2011, dated: 31-5-2011 and CCLA's Ref.No.V1/54/2 011, dt;06-06-2011in condoning the delay of thirteen years and remanding thematter to the R.D.O. and proceedings in Appeal Case No.5282/2011/C, dt:4-1-2012onthefileoftheCourtofRevenueDivisionalOfficer,Visakhapatnamcancellingtheordersdt:8-1-1998inproceedingsNo.A.I.A.C.No.1/98 on the file of the Court of the Mandal Revenue Officer,Gajuwaka and remandingthe matterto the Special DeputyTahasildar(Inams)Visakhapatnam-cum-PrimaryTribunalforconductingdenovoenquiry asper Section7(1)of AndhraPradesh(InamsAbolitionandConversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956 and the consequential proceedings of

Conclusion

the5*'^ respondent madein Rc.No.367/2011/SA/Dt:02/07/2012asbad,illegal,invalidandwithout jurisdiction andconsequentlysetasidetheproceedingsinCCLA'sProgs.No.VI/54/2011,dated:31-5-2011andCCLA'sRef.No.V1/54/2011,dt;06-06-2011incondoningthedelayofthirteen years and remanding the matter to the R.D.O. and proceedings inAppealcaseNo.5282/2011/Cdt:4-1-2012andtheconsequentialproceedingsofthe5threspondentmadeinRc.No.367/2011/SA/Dt:02/07/2012.

I.A. NO: 2 OF 2012 (WPMP. NO: 29730 OF 20121

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying thatin the[circumstances]stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court maybe pleased to suspend the operation of the order dt.04.01.2012 madeinAppeal Case No.5282/2011/C on the file of the Court RevenueDivisionalOfficer, Visakhapatnam pending disposal of the above writ petition.

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2015 (WPMP. NO: 2055 OF 2015)

Between:

1. Sri Sirumala Manikyam, W/o. Late Rajana Raju2.Sri Srimalla Eswaramma, W/o. Seshu Prakash2.Sri Srimalla Eswaramma, W/o. Seshu Prakash

3. Smt. Sreemanthula Lakshmi, D/o. Sankara Rao

4. Sri Sreemanthula Eswara Rao, S/o. Sankara Rao

5. Sri Sreemanthula Sambasiva, S/o. Sankara Rao

6. Sri Koneti Apparao, S/o. Late Veeraswamy j

7. Kum. Koneti Lakshmi, D/o. Appa Rao

8. Kum. Koneti Ganeswari, D/o. Appa Rao

9. Sri Koneti Veeralingam, S/o. Appa Rao, (All are R/o. Aganampudi Village, Gajuwaka Mandal, VisakhapatnamDistrict)District)

(All are Rep. by their GPA holder Sreemantula Sankara[Rao)]

10. Sreemantula Sankara Rao, S/o. Late Pydikonda, D.No.31-10-419[,][ KBC]Towers, S-4 Kurmannapalem, Gajuwaka Mandal, VisakhapatnamDistrict.Towers, S-4 Kurmannapalem, Gajuwaka Mandal, VisakhapatnamDistrict.

...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 6 to 15AND

1. SriBorramma AmmavariTemple,Aganampudivillage,GajuwakaMandal, Visakhapatnam, Rep; by its Manager.Mandal, Visakhapatnam, Rep; by its Manager.

...RESPONDENT/WRIT PETITIONER

2. The Commissioner of Appeals, Office of the Chief Commissioner[of]Land Administration, A.P., Hyderabad.Land Administration, A.P., Hyderabad.

The Joint Collector, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam

4. The Tahsildar, Gajuwaka Mandal, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam[District.]

5.

6. The Special Deputy Tahsildar(lnams), Visakhapatnam,[Visakhapatnam]Dstrict.Dstrict.

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

Petition under Section151 CPC praying thatin the[circumstances]stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may bepleasedto vacate the interim order dated.31.07.2012[passed]in WPMPNo.29730 of 2012 in W.P. No.23268 of 2012.

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K. MADHAVA REDDY(SC FOR ENDOWMENTS AR)

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5; SRI Y. SUBBA[RAO,]ASST.GP FOR REVENUE

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 to 20: SRI A.S.K.[S.][ BHARGAV]Counsel for the Respondents: SRI G .V. RAMANA MURTHY

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 to 15: SRI P. LAKSHMA[REDDY]Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 to 20: SMT.N (P) ANJANA[DEVI]

Between:

DullaRamuNayudu,s/o. Veeranna,Hindu, R;o.D.No.6-6, YedumetlaParawada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.Marripalem, Aganampudi

...PETITIONER

AND

Lankelapalem, Parawada Mandal, Visakhapatnam.

1. The Sub Registrar,

2. Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary,Revenue(Stamps &Registration) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.(Stamps &Registration) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

3, Sri.Borramma Ammavari Temple, Aganampudi Village,[Gajuwaka]Mandal, Visakhapatnam, rep. by its Manager.Mandal, Visakhapatnam, rep. by its Manager.

...respondents

of the Constitution of India praying that inPetition under Article 226affidavit filed therewith, the High Court maythe circumstances stated in theWrit, order or direction, more particularly one inthebe pleased to issue anature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the order of[refusal][ passed][ by][ the]sale deeddt;1respondentin P231/2014, dt.2-8-2014 regarding theNaidu, S/o. Veeranna in my favour as30-7-2014 executed by Dulla Ramof Article 300-A of Constituent ofillegal, arbitrary, capricious and violativeof the Registration Act andIndia and also contraryto the provisionsconsequently to set aside the impugned order /

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2014(WPMP. NO: 28299 OF 2014)

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the[circumstances]stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ[petition,][ the][ High][ Court][ may]be pleased to dispose off the writ petition expeditiously.

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A.S.K.S. BHARGAV FORSRI P. L. NARASIMHA RAO

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2; SRI Y. SUBBA[RAO,]ASST.GP FOR REVENUE

Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI K. MADHAVA REDDY,SC FOR ENDOWMENTS

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

/

/

APHC010351522012IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESHAT AMARAVATI(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3328]

FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNAPRASAD

WRIT PETITION NOs: 23268 OF 2012 & 22565 OF 2014

Between:

1. SRI BORRAMMA AMMAVARI TEMPLE,, AGANAMPUDI VILLAGE,GAJUWAKA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM, REP: BY ITS MANAGER.GAJUWAKA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM, REP: BY ITS MANAGER.

AND

1. THE COMMISSIONER OF APPEALS, OFFICE OF THECHIEFCOMMISSIONER OF LAND ADMINISTRATION, A.P., HYDERABAD.COMMISSIONER OF LAND ADMINISTRATION, A.P., HYDERABAD.

2. THEJOINT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAMDISTRICT.DISTRICT.

3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VISAKHAPATNAM

4. THETAHSILDAR,GAJUWAKAMANDAL,GAJUWAKA,VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.

5jhEspecial DEPUTY TAHSILDARINAMS,VISAKHAPATNAM,VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.

6. SRI SI RU MALA MANIKYAM, W/0 LATE RAJANA RAJU

7. SRI SRIMALLA ESWARAMMA, W/0 SESHU PRAKASH

8. SMT SREEMANTHULA LAKSHMI, D/0 SANKARA RAO

9. SRI SREEMANTHULA ESWARA RAO, S/0 SANKARA RAO

10. SRI SREEMANTHULA SAMBASIVA, S/0 SANKARA RAO

11. SRI KONETI APPARAO, S/0 LATE VEERASWAMY

12. KUM KONETI LAKSHMI, D/0 APPA RAO

13. KUM KONETI GANESWARI, D/0 APPA RAO

14. SRI KONETI VEERALINGAM, S/0 APPA RAO,

15. SREEMANTULA SANKARA RAO, S/0. LATE PYDIKONDA, D.N0.31-10-419,KBCTOWERS,S-4KURMANNAPALEM,GAJUWAKAMANDAL,VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.GPA HOLDER OFRESPONDENTS 6 TO 14

...RESPONDENT(S):

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. K MADHAVA REDDY (SC FOR ENDOWMENTS AR)

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.815/P LAKSHMA REDDY

2. GP FOR REVENUE (AP)

3. G V RAMANA MURTHY

4.6552/N (P) AN JANA DEVI SATYANARAYANA

5. P L NARASIMHA RAO

Between:

1. DULLA RAMU NAYUDU,S/0. VEERANNA, HINDU, R/O.D.NO.6-6YEDUMETLA MARRIPALEM, AGANAMPUDI, PARAWADA MANDALVISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.YEDUMETLA MARRIPALEM, AGANAMPUDI, PARAWADA MANDALVISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. THE SUBREGISTRAR,LANKELAPALEM, PARAWADA MANDAL,VISAKHAPATNAM.VISAKHAPATNAM.

2. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS SECRETARYREVENUE(STAMPS&REGISTRATION)DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, HYDERABAD.

3. SRI BORRAMMA AMMAVARI TEMPLE, AGANAMPUDI VILLAGE,GAJUWAKA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM, REP. BY ITS MANAGER, Counsel for the Petitioner:

...RESPONDENT(S):

1. P L NARASIMHA RAO

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.-

2. GP FOR REVENUE (TG)

The Court made the following COMMON ORDER:

In W.P.No.23268 of 2012, heardSriK. Madhava Reddy,LearnedStanding Counsel for the Writ Petitioner, Sri Y. Subba Rao,learned Asst.Government Pleader for Respondent Nos.1 to 5 and Sri A.S.K.S.Bhargav,Learned Counsel appearing for Respondent Nos. 6 to 20 (impleaded videorder dated 22.09.2014 in W.P.M.P.No.23196 of 2014 as Respondent Nos. 6to 20).

In W.P.No.22565 of 2014, heard Sri A.S.K.S.Bhargav,[learned][ Counsel]for the Writ Petitioner, Sri Y. Subba Rao, learned Asst. Government Pleaderfor Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Sri K. Madhava Reddy,[learned][ Counsel][ for]the Respondent No.3.Respondent No.16 in W.P.No.23268 of 2012is theWrit Petitioner in W.P.No.22565 of 2014.

2. The relief sought in W.P.No.23268 of 2012 is as under; Tor the reasons stated above,it is prayed that this[Hon’ble]Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ order[or]directionmoreparticularly,oneinthenatureofWritofMandamus,declaringtheproceedingsinCCLA’sProgs.No.VI/54/2011,dated:31-05-2011 and CCLA’s Ref[No]VI/54/2011, dt: 06-06-2011 in condoning the delay of[thirteen]years and remanding the matter to the R.D.O and proceedingsin Appeal Case No. 5282/2011/C, dt:4-1-2012 on the[file][ of the]Court of Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam cancellingthe orders dt:8-1-1998 in proceedings No A.I.A.C. No.1/98[on]the file of the Court of the Mandat Revenue Officer, Gajuwakaand remanding the matter to the Special Deputy Tahasildar(Inams) Visakhapatnam-cum-Primary Tribunal for conductingdenovo enquiry as per Section 1 (1) of Andhra Pradesh[(Inams]Abolition and ConversionintoRyotv\/ari)Act,1956andtheconsequential proceedingsof the5^^ respondent madeinRc.No. 367/2011/ S/VDt:02/07/2012 as bad, illegal,[invalid][ and]without jurisdiction and consequently set aside the[proceedings]in CCLA’s Progs.No.V1/54/2011, dated 31-5-2011 and[CCLA’s]Ref.No.V1/54/2011,dt: 06-06-2011in condoning the[delay][ of]thirteen years and remanding the matter to the R.D.O[and]proceedings in Appeal case No.5282/2011/C, dt:4-1-2012[and]the consequential proceedings of the 5^^ respondent[made][ in]Rc.No.367/2011/ SAV Dt: 02/07/2012 and pass such otherorder or orders asthis Hon’ble Court may deemfit[and]proper in the circumstances of the case.”

3. The relief sought in W.P.No.22565 of 2014 is as under:

3. The relief sought in W.P.No.22565 of 2014 is as under:

/ therefore pray that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased[to]issue aWrit, order or direction, more particularly one in[the]nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the order of[refusal]passed by therespondent In P231/2024, dt:2-8-2014regarding the sale deed dt.30-07-2014 executed by DullaRam Naidu, S/o. Veeranna in my favour as illegal, arbitrary,capricious and violative of Article 300-A of Constituent[of]India and also contrary to the provisions of the Registration'Act and consequently to set aside the impugned order[or][ to]pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court[may]deem fit and proper. ”

4. Since parties in both the Writ Petitions and the issues arisinginboth the Writ Petitions are common, both the Writ Petitions are heard jointlyand are being disposed of by the present Common Order.both the Writ Petitions are common, both the Writ Petitions are heard jointlyand are being disposed of by the present Common Order.5.ThefactsasstatedinW.P.No.23268of2012wouldbeconsidered as the foundation, for the present Common Order.considered as the foundation, for the present Common Order.

FACTS AS SET-OUT IN W.P.No.23268 of 2012:

6. The Writ Petition No.23268 of 2012 is filed by the Manager of SriBoramma Ammavari Temple of Aganampudi Village of GajuwakaMandal,Visakhapatnam District. The facts as stated in the Affidavit filed in support ofthis Writ Petition are that, an extent of Ac.8.03 cents in Survey No.156/1 andan extent of Ac. 11.85 centsin Survey No. 156/2(total extent of Ac.1Sj.88cents) is the land that was owned by the Boramma Ammavari Temple; that thePropertyRegistermaintainedunder Section43of theAndhraPradeshCharitable Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (Act 30 of1987)showsthatthe aboveextentsoflandareclassifiedastempleproperties; that as per Sub-section 3 of Section 46 of Act 30 of 1987, there isa statutory presumption as regards the ownership by the temple in terms oftheentriesmadeinthePropertyRegister,unlessandotherwiseitisestablished to the contrary; that one Sri Koneti Venkata Ramana andfourothers, represented by their General Power of Attorney[holder][ Sri][ Chirumalla]Yellayya Lingamof Aganampudivillagehasfiled W.P.No.7678of1994seeking a direction to the Joint Collectpr and the Mandal RevenueOfficerBoramma Ammavari Temple of Aganampudi Village of GajuwakaMandal,Visakhapatnam District. The facts as stated in the Affidavit filed in support ofthis Writ Petition are that, an extent of Ac.8.03 cents in Survey No.156/1 andan extent of Ac. 11.85 centsin Survey No. 156/2(total extent of Ac.1Sj.88cents) is the land that was owned by the Boramma Ammavari Temple; that thePropertyRegistermaintainedunder Section43of theAndhraPradeshCharitable Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (Act 30 of1987)showsthatthe aboveextentsoflandareclassifiedastempleproperties; that as per Sub-section 3 of Section 46 of Act 30 of 1987, there isa statutory presumption as regards the ownership by the temple in terms oftheentriesmadeinthePropertyRegister,unlessandotherwiseitisestablished to the contrary; that one Sri Koneti Venkata Ramana andfourothers, represented by their General Power of Attorney[holder][ Sri][ Chirumalla]Yellayya Lingamof Aganampudivillagehasfiled W.P.No.7678of1994seeking a direction to the Joint Collectpr and the Mandal RevenueOfficer Gajuwaka to dispose of the Application filed by them,[which]was pending forgrant of Ryotwari Patta; that the said W.P.No.7678 of 1994was disposed ofvide order dated 13.02.1995 by directing the Joint Collector (RespondentNo.1therein) and the Mandal Revenue Officer to dispose of the said Application.

6.1. IncompliancewiththeabovementioneddirectioninW.P.No.7678 of 1994, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Gajuwaka undertooktheenquiry and passed a Speaking Order dated 08.01.1998 (Ex.P.4) by holdingthat the subject land is partly cultivated by the Respondents therein.Itisnoted that the Writ Petitioners therein have not producedany recordorevidence in support of their claim and thereforeit has becomemandatory torely only upon the Government records.mentioneddirectioninW.P.No.7678 of 1994, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Gajuwaka undertooktheenquiry and passed a Speaking Order dated 08.01.1998 (Ex.P.4) by holdingthat the subject land is partly cultivated by the Respondents therein.Itisnoted that the Writ Petitioners therein have not producedany recordorevidence in support of their claim and thereforeit has becomemandatory torely only upon the Government records.

6.2. It is further recorded that as seen from the entries recordediInamFairRegister,theInamgrant wasconfirmedunderTitleDeed[n](T,D).No.3016 of Devadayam granted for the performance of annual festivalcalledas‘Jathara’of the Gramadevathaserviceperformedby tom-tombeatings. The names of Jangala Veeranna and Koneti Challaiah and sonswere recorded in their register so as to perform the services.Having notedthese facts,it was categorically held by the Mandal Revenue Officer in hisProceeding dated 08.01.1998 that the grant was made for the benefit of deityand therefore, neither the Respondents nor the Writ Petitioners haveany rightortitleinrespectof thelands andthatthelandsaremeantfortheperformance of the services of the village Goddess-GramaDevataItisfurther stated that in view of the sufficient proof, an extent of land of Ac.08.03

cents in Survey No. 156/1 and an extent of Ac. 11.85 cents in Survey No. 156/2arevestedwithBorammaDevathaDevastanam,AganampudiVillageofGajuwaka Mandal to render services to the deity.

6.3. It is further stated by the Writ Petitioners that, this Order passedagainst the Unofficial Respondents herein was not challenged by any of theaggrieved parties until the year 2011.It is further stated that an Appeal wasfiled before the Revenue Divisional Officer under Section 7 (2) of the AndhraPradesh (Andhra Area) Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act1956. The statutory period provided for filing an Appeal is 60 days. ThereforetheRevenueDivisionalOfficerhadreturnedtheAppealasbeingnotmaintainableasthesameisbeyondthelimitationvideorderdated09.02.2011.Having been aggrieved by the rejection of the Appeal vide orderdated 09.02.2011 by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Smt. Sirumala Manikyamand eight others have filed a Revision Petition on[14.02.2011][ before][ the][ Court]of the Commissioner of Land Administration (CCLA).Itis to be noted thatneithertheWritPetitionerin W.P.No.23268of 2012northe EndowmentDepartment weremadepartiesintheRevisionfiledbySmt.SirumalaManikyam and eight others (Copy of the RevisionPetitionis filed by theLearned Government Pleader for Revenue vide Memo dated 26.08.2022).

6.4. 'On31.03.2011,the CCLAhascalledforremarksfromtheTahsildar, Gajuwaka Mandal with a further direction[to][ submit][ a][ report.][ Vide]Proceeding bearingRc.No.367/2011/A, dated12.05.2011,the TahsildarofGajuwaka Mandal has submitted his Report (Ex.P.5).It is stated in the Report

that the original file of the then Mandal Revenue Officer, Gajuwaka in AIACNo.1/98 dated 08.01.1998is not available.Itis also stated that a furthersearch was made in the Record Room of Tahasildar’s Office, Gajuwakabutthe said file has not been traced.However,it is stated that the zerox copy ofthe order passed by the then Mandal Revenue Officer dated 08.01.1998isavailable.It is also stated in the Report of the Tahsildar dated 12.05.2011,bearing Rc.No.367/2011/A (Ex.P.5) that no mutation was carried out in theRevenue record as per the Order of the Mandal Revenue Officer, Gajuwakadated 08.01.1998 in the names of Boramma Devatha Devastanam, Gajuwaka.It is also stated that in view of the fact that the subject landis a grant forspecific purpose of rendering service to the village Goddess and the orderswere issued by the then Mandal Revenue Officer on misrepresentation of thefacts and against the spirit of the original grant, the Tahsildar requested toremand the matter to the Primary Tribunal and Spl. Deputy Tahsildar (Inam),Visakhapatnam for de novo enquiry in the interest of justice since the allegedpattadars are insisting for issuance of Pattadar Pass Books and Title Deeds.

6.5. Itis further submitted that the COLA, having consideredthecontentions of the Revision Petitioners, had noted that the Revenue DivisionalOfficer has rejected the Appeal filed by the Revision Petitioners only on theground of delay for about thirteen (13) years without going into the merits. InPara No.6 of the order passed by the COLA dated 31.05.2011 (Ex.P.7), theCOLA had condoned the delay and remanded the matter to the RevenueDivisional Officer, Visakhapatnam yvith a further direction to hear the matter by givinganopportunitytothePetitionersconcerned andpassappropriateorders basing on the merits of the case, keeping in view the provisions of theInam Abolition Act, 1956.The Order of the Commissioner, Appeals dated31.05.2011 (Ex.P.7) was communicated to the parties including the RevenueDivisional Officer, Visakhapatnam Division vide Proceeding bearing CCLA’sref.No.VI/54/2011,dated06.06.2011(Ex.P.8).TheRevenueDivisionalOfficer, Visakhapatnam, having considered the submissions of one Smt.P.Geethabala, Advocate, on behalf of the Appellants therein and the WrittenStatement filed by the Tahsildar, Gajuwaka dated 12.05.2011, held thatitisfound according to the Revenue record that the subject[land][ stands][ classified]as Inam (dry) andit was registeredin the name of Sri Dulla Sanyasi,SriSeerumalla Butchanna and Sri Koneti Veeraswamy under[TD.No.3016][ and]that the said land was originally granted by the Inam[in][ favour][ of][ the][ ancestors]of the Appellants to perform the festival and regular poojato thevillageGoddess Boramma Devatha and the same was also recorded in the Inam FairRegister.

6.6. ItisfurtherstatedbytheRevenueDivisionalOfficerthataccording to the Inam Fair Register, the Inam grant[was][ confirmed][ in][ favour][ of]the ancestors of the Appellants under T.D.No.3016 to perform the festivalcalled as ‘Jathara’ of Grama Devatha.It is further held that as per the presentCultivation Account V.A.No.3 furnished by the Tahsildar of Gajuwaka,thenames of Dulla Sanyasi and others and Koneti Veeraswamy[were][ recorded][ as]Pattadar under TD No.3016.While holding the same, the orders passed by the Mandal Revenue Officer of Gajuwaka dated 08.01.1998 were set aside bythe Revenue Divisional Officer and had remanded the matter backto thePrimary Tribunal-cum-Special Deputy Tahsildar (Inams), Visakhapatnam forconducting an enquiry by according reasonable opportunity[to][ the][ interested]persons and pass appropriate orders under Section 7(1)of the AndhraPradesh (Inams Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956) (Ex.P.6).

6.7. TheManagerof Boramma Ammavaritemple,havingbeenaggrieved by the remand orders passed by the CCLA dated 31.05.2011,which was communicated vide Proceeding dated 06.06.2011, has challengedthe same in W.P.No.23268 of 2012.aggrieved by the remand orders passed by the CCLA dated 31.05.2011,which was communicated vide Proceeding dated 06.06.2011, has challengedthe same in W.P.No.23268 of 2012.

7. The Writ Petition No.22565 of 2014 is filed by one[Sri][ Dulla][ Rama]Nayudu (who is arrayed as impleaded Respondent No.16 in W.P.No.23268 of2012)againsttheSub-RegistrarofLankelapalem,ParawadaMandal,Visakhapatnam challenging the Refusal Order passed by the Sub-Registrar(Respondent No.1) bearing P.No.231/2014 dated 02.08.2014 insofar as theSale Deed dated 30.07.2014 is concerned with a consequential[direction][ to]receive and register the Sale Deed.However, the copy[of][ the][ Sale] Deeddated 30.07.2014 has not been placed on record nor has the Writ Petitionerplaced on record any details in the Affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petitionexcept sWing that the land of an extent of Ac. 1.95 cents in Survey No. 156/2 isthe subject matter of the Sale Deed.Nayudu (who is arrayed as impleaded Respondent No.16 in W.P.No.23268 of2012)againsttheSub-RegistrarofLankelapalem,ParawadaMandal,Visakhapatnam challenging the Refusal Order passed by the Sub-Registrar(Respondent No.1) bearing P.No.231/2014 dated 02.08.2014 insofar as theSale Deed dated 30.07.2014 is concerned with a consequential[direction][ to]receive and register the Sale Deed.However, the copy[of][ the][ Sale] Deeddated 30.07.2014 has not been placed on record nor has the Writ Petitionerplaced on record any details in the Affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petitionexcept sWing that the land of an extent of Ac. 1.95 cents in Survey No. 156/2 isthe subject matter of the Sale Deed.

8. discussion-

It transpires from the record,i.e., from Order passed in the RevisionPetition filed by Smt. SirumallaManikyam and eight otherson 14.02.2011,that the order passed by the CCLAdated 31.05.2011 and the Proceedingsbefore the Revenue Divisional Officerdated 04.01.2012 to the effect that SriBoramma Ammavari Temple represented by its’ Manager wasnever made asa party and also that the Revenue Authoritiesvi-viz.,the Mandal RevenueOfficer, the Revenue Divisional Officerand the CCLA were never made asparties and therefore they never had the occasion to consider any of thematerial documents, whichwere in their possession, which are relied by theWrit Petitioner in W.P.No.23268 of 2012.

9. This Court notices that the said Writ Petitioner-iIS placing relianceon the recording of the subject landi[n]theProperty Register’ maintainedunder Section 43 of the Act 30 of 1987.Therefore, even the issue of statutorypresumption in favour of the Writ Petitioner under sub Section 3 of Section 46of the Act 30of 1987also couldnot belooked-intoby the RevenueAuthorities.However, the CCLA vide proceeding dated 31.05.2011, havingtaken note of the Report submitted by the Tahsildar dated12.05.2011(Ex.P.5), had rightly remanded the matter to the Revenue Divisional Officer,Visakhapatnam for considering thecase of the parties on merits.This apart,the Revenue Divisional Officer, having noticed the fact that the subject landstands classified as Inam dry and that itwas registered in the name of certainpersons asInamtoperformfestivals andregular poojasto thevillage

Goddess Boramma Devatha and the same having been recorded[in][ the][ Inam]Fair Register, had thought fit to remit the matter[back][ to][ the][ Primary][ Tribunal-]cum-Special Deputy Tahsildar (Inams) for conducting[of][ de][ novo][ enquiry][ by]providing reasonable opportunity to the interested[persons][ and][ thereafter][ to]pass appropriate orders.This Court has noticed that[all][ the][ concerned][ stake]holders were never put on notice in any of the proceedings[and][ they][ were]never arrayed as parties in one single Proceeding.Arraying all parties in onesingleProceedings wouldbenecessary,because,itwouldenablethe‘appropriate authority’ to consider all the contentions[of][ the][ competing][ claims]from one platform and in one Proceedings.

DIRECTIONS:

10. In view of the aforesaid discussion, W.P.No.23268 of[2012]isdismissedasbeingdevoidofmerit. ThePrimary Tribunal-cum-Spe[cial]Deputy Tahsildar (Inams), Visakhapatnam is directed[to][ conduct][ a][ de novo]enquiry after giving Notice to‘all the parties (interested[persons)’][ and][ after]providingreasonableopportunityofhearingtoallinterestedpersons.Thereafter,thePrimary Tribunal-cum-SpecialDeputyTahsildar(Inams),Visakhapatnam, shall pass appropriate Orders under[the][ provisions][ of][ Section]7(1) of A.P (inams Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari)[Act,][ 1956.]

11. In thelight of the above discussion the prayers as[sought]inW.P.Nos.22565 of 2014 cannot be granted.The said prayers can only beconsidered only after ascertaining the rights of all[the][ stakeholders][ in][ the][ de]W.P.Nos.22565 of 2014 cannot be granted.The said prayers can only beconsidered only after ascertaining the rights of all[the][ stakeholders][ in][ the][ de]

novoenquiry that would be conducted by the Primary Tribunal-cum-Spec[ial]Deputy Tahsildar (Inams).Accordingly, this Court deemsit appropriatetodirect the Writ Petitioners in W.P.No.22565 of 2014 to approach the PrimaryTribunal-cum-SpecialDeputyTahsildar(Inams), Visakhapatnamtofileappropriate petitions in the enquiry that is directed to be conducted.NeedlesstostatethatthePrimaryTribunal-cum-SpecialDeputyTahsildar,Visakhapatnam shall issue Notices to all the persons concerned (interestedpersons)includingallthepartiesinW.P.No.22565of2014.ThisW.P.No.22565 of 2014 is accordingly disposed of.Deputy Tahsildar (Inams).Accordingly, this Court deemsit appropriatetodirect the Writ Petitioners in W.P.No.22565 of 2014 to approach the PrimaryTribunal-cum-SpecialDeputyTahsildar(Inams), Visakhapatnamtofileappropriate petitions in the enquiry that is directed to be conducted.NeedlesstostatethatthePrimaryTribunal-cum-SpecialDeputyTahsildar,Visakhapatnam shall issue Notices to all the persons concerned (interestedpersons)includingallthepartiesinW.P.No.22565of2014.ThisW.P.No.22565 of 2014 is accordingly disposed of.

12. The Primary Tribunal-cum-Special Deputy Tahsildar (Inams),Visakhapatnam is directed to conform to the above directions and completethe enquiry within a period of six months from the date of uploading of thisOrder onthe websiteofthisCourt.The Primary Tribunal-cum-SpecialDeputy Tahsildar (Inams), Visakhapatnam shall adhere to the Principles ofNaturalJustice.He shall admit new documents, which are sought to besubmitted by the concerned persons (interested persons)[and][ consider][ the]same and pass reasoned/speaking Order within a periodof twomonthsthereafter.Needlesstostatethattherightsof the WritPetitionersinW.P.No.22565 of 2014 in seeking registration of Sale Deed dated 30.07.2014would depend on the final out-come in the enquiry which is to be conducted bythe Primary Tribunal-cum- Special Deputy Tahsildar, Visakhapatnam.NoOrder as to Costs.Visakhapatnam is directed to conform to the above directions and completethe enquiry within a period of six months from the date of uploading of thisOrder onthe websiteofthisCourt.The Primary Tribunal-cum-SpecialDeputy Tahsildar (Inams), Visakhapatnam shall adhere to the Principles ofNaturalJustice.He shall admit new documents, which are sought to besubmitted by the concerned persons (interested persons)[and][ consider][ the]same and pass reasoned/speaking Order within a periodof twomonthsthereafter.Needlesstostatethattherightsof the WritPetitionersinW.P.No.22565 of 2014 in seeking registration of Sale Deed dated 30.07.2014would depend on the final out-come in the enquiry which is to be conducted bythe Primary Tribunal-cum- Special Deputy Tahsildar, Visakhapatnam.NoOrder as to Costs.

I

13. It is made clear that this Court has not expressedany opinion onmerits concerning any of the rights of the parties.The observationsmade,ifany, are only limited to the disposal of the present Writ Petitions.

14. Interlocutory Applications,if any, stand closed in termsof this order.

Sd/- K.J. RAJA BABUASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1. The Commissioner of Appeals, Office of the Chief CommissionerofLand Administration, A.P., Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.Land Administration, A.P., Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.

2. The Joint Collector, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam

4. The Tahsildar, Gajuwaka Mandal, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam District.5. The Special Deputy Tahsildar(lnams), Visakhapatnam, VisakhapatnamDistrict.5. The Special Deputy Tahsildar(lnams), Visakhapatnam, VisakhapatnamDistrict.

6. The Sub Registrar, Lankelapalem, Parawada Mandal, Visakhapatnam.7. The Secretary, Revenue (Stamps & Registration) Department,Government of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi,Amaravati, Guntur District.7. The Secretary, Revenue (Stamps & Registration) Department,Government of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi,Amaravati, Guntur District.

8. The Manager, Sri Borramma Ammavari Temple, Aganampudi Village,Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam.Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam.

9. One CC to Sri K. Madhava Reddy, SC for Endowments [OPUC]

10. One CC to Sri P. Lakshma Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]

11 .Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of AndhraPradesh. [OUT]Pradesh. [OUT]

12. One CC to Sri N (P) Anjana Devi, Advocate [OPUC]

13. One CC to Sri P. L. Narsimha Rao, Advocate (OPUC)

14. One CC to Sri G.V. Ramana Murthy, Advocate (OPUC)

15. One CC to Sri A.S.K.S. Bhargav, Advocate (OPUC)

16. Three C.D. Copies.

Cnr

HIGH COURT.;-i«^•4i.w-*DATED:29/12/2023

m,,g2 0 NOV 20211. Current Saction ^s pat c

COMMON ORDER

WP.Nos.23268 of 2012 and 22565 of 2014

DISPOSING OF THE W.PsWITHOUT COSTS