Gollapudi Apparao Vs State of A.P. — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

Gollapudi Apparao Vs State of A.P. — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to invoke the alternative remedy under Section 87 of the Act, to be exercised within six weeks; interim suspension of the impugned proceedings to continue until the appeal is filed; writ petition disposed of with no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the proceedings Rc.No.DP2/22611/2016 dated 20.09.2016 publishing Sri Chennakesava Swamy Temple under Section 6(c)(ii) of Act No. 30 of 1987, and the consequent appointment of Respondent No. 5 as Executive Officer, are illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Permission is accorded and the petitioners are permitted to avail the remedy under the provisions of the Act (the alternative remedy under Section 87).

Key takeaways

The interim suspension of the impugned proceedings shall stand continued until the appeal under Section 87 of the Act is filed.ratio¶41
The petitioners are directed to invoke the alternative remedy under Section 87 of the Act within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of the order.ratio¶43

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Andhra Pradesh High Court (Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao, J.) disposed of a writ petition under Article 226 challenging proceedings Rc.No.DP2/22611/2016 dated 20.09.2016, whereby the temple at Borravaripalem Village, Prathipadu Mandal, Guntur District (Sri Chennakesava Swamy Temple) was declared and published as a Hindu religious institution under Section 6(c)(ii) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (Act 30 of 1987), and the consequent proceedings Rc.No.E1123839/2016 dated 04.10.2016 appointing Respondent No. 5 as Executive Officer. On learned counsel stating that the petitioners had an alternative remedy under Section 87 of the Act and seeking leave to invoke it, the Court accorded permission, directed the petitioners to invoke the Section 87 remedy within six weeks, ordered that the suspension of the impugned proceedings continue until the appeal is filed, and disposed of the writ petition with no order as to costs. Merits of the challenge were not adjudicated.

APHC010721782016

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

[3330]

WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

WRIT PETITION NO: 36008/2016

Between:

GOLLAPUDI APPARAO, S/O. RAMALINGAM HINDU, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/O. NANDIGAMA, KRISHNA DISTRICT

GOLLAPUDI CHALAPATHI RAO, S/O. RAMALINGAM HINDU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O. NANDIGAMA, KRISHNA DISTRICT

...PETITIONER(S) AND

STATE OF A P, REP. BY ITS PRI. SECRETARY, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD.

THE COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS, ENDOWRAENTS DEPARTMENT, ANDHRA PRADESH, 0/O. BOGGULAKUNTA, HYDERABAD.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

Y NAGARJUNA BABU, EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF SRI CHENNAKESAVA SWAMY TEMPLE, & EXECUTIVE OFFICER, PRATHIPADU GROUP OF TEMPLES, PRATHIPADU (V & M), GUNTUR DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

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 pleased toto issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of a "Writ of Mandamus" declaring the action of the Respondent No. 2 in issuing proceedings Rc.No.DP2/22611/2016 dated 20.09.2016, publishing Sri Chennakesava Swamy temple, situated in Borravaripalem Village,

2

Prathipadu Mandal, Guntur District, under Section 6(c)(ii) of Act No. 30 of 1987 and consequently appointing the Respondent No. 5 as the Executive Officer of the Temple vide proceedings Rc.No.E1123839/2016 dated 04.10.2016 as being illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and in violation of The Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions & Endowment Act, 1987('the Act') and also the directions issued by this Hon'ble Court in W.A. No. 808 of 2016 dated 11.03.2003 and consequently set-aside the impugned proceedings Rc.No.DP2/22611/2016 dated 20.09.2016, as also consequent proceedings Rc.No.E1123839/2016 dated 04.10.2016 as being illegal, arbitrary, without Jurisdiction and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2016(WVMP 4420 OF 2016

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 vacate the interim orders passed in W.P.No.36008 of 2016 dated 25-10-2016

IA NO: 2 OF 2016(WPMP 44375 OF 2016

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 suspend the impugned proceedings Rc_No.DP2/22611/2016 dated 20.09.2016, as also the consequent proceedings Rc.No.E1/23839/2016 dated 04.10.2016 and pass

IA NO: 3 OF 2016(WPMP 50105 OF 2016

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 permit the respondent No.5 to file the additional counter affidavit along with the documents

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1.N ASHWANI KUMAR

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP)

2.ELEVATED AS JUDGE

The Court made the following:

3

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 36008 of 2016

ORDER:

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the present writ petition is filed challenging the proceedings in Rc.No.DP2/22611/2016, dated 20.09.2016, which is impugned in the present writ petition.

In the impugned proceedings, the 4^th respondent declared Sri Chennakesava Swamy Temple as Hindu religious institution and published under Section 6(c)(ii) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (Act 30 of 1987) (for short hereinafter called as ‘the Act’).

Now the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are having alternative remedy under Section 87 of the above Act against the proceedings impugned in the writ petition and requested to allow the petitioners to invoke the alternative remedy.

Permission is accorded and the petitioners are permitted to avail

the remedy under the provisions of the above said Act.

This Court suspended the impugned proceedings and the same shall be continued till the filing of the appeal under Section 87 of the Act. Petitioner is further directed to invoke the alternative remedy

4

under Section 87 of the Act within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of this order.

With the above said direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

Date : 17.06.2026 SJ

5

37

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

WRIT PETITION NO: 36008 of 2016

Date : 17.06.2026

SJ