Partly allowed

Sri Medala Valasa Bhaskara Rao, v. The Government of A.P

Telangana HC9 Jun 2006WP/11366/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ for lease extension of Hindu endowment lands due to climatic loss. Court declined principal relief as beyond Article 226 jurisdiction but directed forwarding of application to competent authority for consideration without deciding merits.

What did the court decide?

Order to forward petitioner's application to competent authority for consideration; principal relief for lease extension denied.

Sri Medala Valasa Bhaskara Rao, Vs The Government of A.P — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2006)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM

¶2

W.P.No. 11366 of 2006

¶3

09-06-2006

¶4

Between:-

¶5

Sri Medala Valasa Bhaskara Rao

¶6

Petitioner And

¶7

The Government of A.P., rep., by the Commissioner, Endowments Department, Hyderabad and another.

¶8

Respondents

¶9

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM

¶10

W.P.No. 11366 of 2006

¶11

Oral order:

¶12

The petitioner was the cultivating tenant of wet lands ad-measuring Ac.06-50 cents in R.S. Nos. 806/3, 808/5, 827/3 and 854/1 of Kaikaram village, Unguturu mandal, West Godavari district belonging to the Guttikonda Venkanna Choultry. The lease was for a period of three years -- 2003-04 to 2005-06. The period for which the petitioner was granted lease of the lands is coming to a close. The petitioner claims to have suffered a loss in the previous year due to adverse climatic conditions. He therefore made an application on 06-06-

¶13

2006 to the 2^nd respondent for extension of the lease period by one more year to offset the loss suffered by him during the previous year. Alleging that the representation is yet to be disposed of, he filed the writ petition, within forty eight (48) hours (of making the representation), on 08-06-2006 seeking a direction to the respondents to permit him to cultivate the lands till June, 2007. In substance, the petitioner seeks a Mandamus for extension of lease by this court, a relief that is beyond the province of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India or in exercise of the judicial power of the State.

¶14

Under the provisions of the relevant statutory rules made under the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short ‘the Act’), it is only the Commissioner of Endowments that can approve/grant leases of immoveable properties belonging to Hindu religious endowments or charitable institutions, otherwise than by way of public auction.

¶15

As the petitioner has submitted an application to the 2^nd respondent, the 2^nd respondent is directed to forward the same to the 1^st respondent (the competent authority) and the 1^st respondent may consider, within the spectrum of his statutory discretion whether a case is

¶16

made out by the petitioner for granting him lease of the lands in question otherwise than by way of public auction. The leases of the lands of the Devasthanams now proposed, cannot however be interdicted on the basis of any material placed in this writ petition.

¶17

In the aforesaid circumstances, and after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, the writ petition itself is disposed of declining the principal relief claimed by the petitioner. The application made by the petitioner to the 2^nd respondent on 06-06-2006 shall be forwarded by the 2^nd respondent to the 1^st respondent and the same shall be considered by the 1^st respondent as an application made to the said respondent. The 1^st respondent may consider expeditious disposal of the representation of the petitioner. Nothing in this order shall be construed as an expression by this court on the merits of the petitioner’s claim. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

¶18

_________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J

¶19

Dated:09-06-2006 Pvks/*

Sri Medala Valasa Bhaskara Rao, v. The Government of A.P

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Medala Valasa Bhaskara Rao, v. The Government of A.P

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Ranabothu Anantha Reddy, Vs The District Collector

Mohd.Farooq, Vs Commissioner of Police

Ponnuri Chinna Venkat Reddy, Vs Southern Power Distrubution Company of a.P.Ltd

Sri Kadali Subba Rao, Vs The Regional Joint Commissioner

T.Ravindranadha Tagore Vs The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad

Y.Vijaya Kumari, Vs The Special Officer and Competent