Disposed¶40

S Hanumantha Reddy v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC3 Nov 2025WP/29949/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Natural justice; opportunity of hearing before dispossession order under Section 83(2), A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987; Sathram operated by petitioners for pilgrims at Penchalakona temple; non-compliance with earlier writ direction in W.P. No. 21406 of 2025 (order dated 12.08.2025); fresh hearing directed within six weeks; mandamus under Article 226; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to give sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass appropriate orders pursuant to the show cause notice dated 14.07.2025 within six weeks from receipt of the order; writ petition disposed of with no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous applications closed. ¶40

S Hanumantha Reddy Vs the State of Ap — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶40

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned proceedings in Rc.No. 19/2025 dated 24.10.2025 passed by respondent No.3 seeking to dispossess the petitioners, allegedly without an opportunity of hearing and contrary to this Court's order dated 12.08.2025 in W.P.No.21406 of 2025, are illegal and arbitrary.

¶31

Court's answer

On the instructions placed before the Court by learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.3, a perusal thereof reflects that opportunity of hearing was not given to the petitioners as directed by this Court in its order dated 12.08.2025 in W.P.No.21406 of 2025.

¶38

Ratio / Principle

Having regard to the contentions, the Court deemed it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition directing the respondents to give sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass appropriate orders pursuant to the show cause notice dated 14.07.2025, within six weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

¶39

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (AP High Court, Amaravati, W.P. No. 29949 of 2025, decided 04.11.2025, Kiranmayee Mandava J.): Petitioners, who run a Sathram providing food and accommodation to pilgrims at Penusila Lakshmi Narasimhaswamyvarla Temple, Penchalakona, challenged orders of respondent No.3 in Rc.No. 19/2025 dated 24.10.2025 issued under Section 83(2) of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 seeking their dispossession from Hare Rama Hare Krishna Kshethram and Bandi Sankar Reddy Sathram. Following an earlier round (orders dated 02.08.2025 set aside by this Court on 12.08.2025 in W.P. No. 21406 of 2025 with a direction to pass fresh orders pursuant to the show cause notice dated 14.07.2025), the fresh impugned proceedings were again passed without affording the petitioners an opportunity of hearing; instructions placed before the Court confirmed non-compliance with the earlier direction. HELD: the writ petition was disposed of directing the respondents to give sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass appropriate orders pursuant to the show cause notice dated 14.07.2025 within six weeks from receipt of the order. No costs; pending miscellaneous applications closed.

¶1

[3458]

¶2

APHC010580702025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 29949/2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

S HANUMANTHA REDDY, S/O. NARASIMHA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS, R/O. HARERAMA KSHETHRAM, PENCHALAKONA, RAPUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.

¶9

GADDAM SRIHARI REDDY,, S/O. GADDAM VENKAT REDDY, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O.PENCHALAKONA ROAD, SAIDADUPALLI, RAPUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.

¶10

...PETITIONER(S)

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF AP, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

¶13

THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, VIJAYAWADA.

¶14

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND EXECUTIVE OFFICER, PENUSILA LAKSHMI NARASIMHASWAMYVARLA TEMPLE, PENCHALAKONA KSHETHRAM, GONUPALLI VILLAGE, RAPUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.

¶15

THE TAHSILDAR, RAPUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.

¶16

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be

¶18

¶19

pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring action of the respondents in trying to disposes the petitioners from Hare Rama Hare Krishna Kshethram and Bandi Sankar Reddy Sathram by issuing orders of the 3RD respondent in Rc.No. 19/2025 dated 24.10.2025 as illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice, one without jurisdiction and violation of Sec.83 of The A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from the subject premises i.e.. Hare Rama Hare Krishna Kshethram and Bandi Sankar Reddy Sathram by setting aside the orders of the 3RD respondent in Rc.No. 19/2025 dated 24.10.2025 and pass

¶20

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from the subject premises i.e., Hare Rama Hare Krishna Kshethram and Bandi Sankar Reddy Sathram by suspending the orders of the 3rd respondent in Rc.No. 19/2025 dated 24.10.2025, during pendency of the Writ petition and pass

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶23

1.C SUBODH

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶25

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶26

2.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS

¶27

The Court made the following:

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

Heard Sri C. Subodh, learned counsel for the petitioners, the

¶30

learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments and Sri Anne Devi Subhashini, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.3.

¶31

The grievance of the petitioners is that the impugned proceedings are passed without giving an opportunity of hearing to the

¶32

¶33

petitioners, contrary to the orders of this Court, dated 12.08.2025 in W.P.No.21406 of 2025.

¶34

It is contended that the petitioners have been providing food and accommodation to the piligrims visiting the 3^rd respondent Temple. It is contended that the Temple has vast extents of land, but it is not catering to their needs of piligrims for providing accommodation and food. The Temple has allotted a piece of land to the petitioners for the construction of the Sathram. In the said land, the petitioners have established the Sathram and have been operating it.

¶35

The allegation against the petitioners is that they have been in occupation of the subject property without any valid permission from Respondent No. 3, Temple. In connection thereto, a Show Cause Notice, dated 14.07.2025 is issued under Section 83(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (herein after referred as ‘the Act’), to which the petitioners have submitted their explanations on 28.07.2025 and 26.07.2025. However, without considering the petitioners’ explanation, the respondent No.3 passed orders on 02.08.2025 directing the petitioners to vacate the subject premises on 12.08.2025. Challenging the same, the petitioners have filed W.P.No.21406 of 2025. The said Writ Petition was disposed of on 12.08.2025, setting aside the impugned

¶36

¶37

proceedings directing the respondents to pass appropriate orders pursuant to the show cause notice under Section 83(2) of the Act. In pursuance thereof, the impugned proceedings have been passed without giving an opportunity of hearing the petitioners. Hence the present Writ Petition.

¶38

Smt. Anne Devi Subhashini, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.3 placed before the Court a copy of instructions received by her in the case. A perusal of the same would reflect that opportunity of hearing to the petitioners was not given as directed by this Court.

¶39

Having regard to the contentions advanced, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition directing the respondents to give sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass appropriate orders pursuant to the show cause notice, dated 14.07.2025, within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

¶40