Chennaiah Gari Gopal Vs the State of Ap

CHENNAIAH GARI CHENGAREDDY,, S/O. LATE CHENNAIAH GARI THIMMAPPA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/O. 1-56, KURIJAIA, RAMASAMUDRAM MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT - 517411.

¶11

...PETITIONER(S)

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAL BUILDING VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶14

THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA.

¶15

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, RAYACHOTY, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.

¶16

THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, GROUP TEMPLES, MADANAPALLE, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.

¶17

THE TAHSILDAR, MADANAPALIE ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, A.P

¶18

C REDDAPPA, S/O VENKATA SWAMY, AGED ABOUT YEARS,R/O KURIJALA VILLAGE, MADANAPALLI MANDAL, ANNAMAIAH DISTRICT. R6 IS IMPLEADED AS PER THE COURT'S ORDER

¶19

2

¶20

DT.05.11.2025 IN I.A.NO.03 OF 2025.

¶21

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶23

1.K VENKATA SUBBAIAH

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶25

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶26

2.T VENU GOPAL SC FOR ENDOWMENTS (RAYALASEEMA REGION)

¶27

3.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS

¶28

4.M VENKATA RAMANA REDDY

¶29

3

¶30

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶31

WRIT PETITION NO: 2658 OF 2025

¶32

The Court made the following order :

¶33

The present writ petition is filed challenging the action of the 4^th respondent in issuing the impugned notice dated 21.10.2024 under Section 83(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 8the Act9).

¶34

Heard Sri K.G.Krishna Murthy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Sri K.Venkata Subbaiah, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 3, Sri T.Venu Gopal, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.4, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent No.5 and Sri M.Venkata Ramana Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.6.

¶35

The grounds on which the impugned proceedings are challenged are that, despite the order of injunction granted by the competent Civil Court in O.S.No.225 of 1989 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Punganuru (Chittoor District), the respondents have proposed to issue a notice under Section 83(2) of the Act.

¶36

On 04.02.2025, this Court granted an interim direction to maintain the status quo with respect to the scheduled land, i.e., Ac.1.60 cents situated in Sy.No.52/14, Kurijala Village, Ramasamudram Mandal, Annamayya District.

¶37

4

¶38

The 4^th respondent filed a counter-affidavit stating that after issuance of

¶39

notice, since the petitioner did not file any reply, an auction in respect of the said property was held on 15.11.2024. It is stated that the unofficial respondent No.6 herein was declared the highest bidder in the said public auction and the lease was granted in his favour. The Commissioner of the Endowments Department approved the lease. The 4^th respondent has also put the 6^th respondent in possession of the subject property, being the highest bidder. It is further stated that the petitioners were also aware of the public auction conducted on 15.11.2024.

¶40

Sri M.Venkata Ramana Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.6 submits that the petitioner herein had also participated in the said auction. After the conclusion of the auction proceedings, possession of the subject property was handed over to the unofficial respondent No.6.

¶41

Without going into the merits of the case, after considering the submissions of both the learned counsels, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by granting liberty to the petitioners to file their objections to the impugned notice dated 21.10.2024 issued under Section 83(2) of the Act. Upon such objections, the 4^th respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders within four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of such objections. The 4^th respondent is also at liberty to pass final orders if no objections are received within the said period.

¶42