Dismissed¶26

Urugonda Kanakaratnam v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC5 Mar 2025WP/28474/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Telangana High Court writ petition dismissed as infructuous without costs; endowment shop eviction and tender-cum-public auction challenge (shop No. 7, Ganesh Temple/shopping complex, Kothagudem, Khammam); notice R.C.No. 18116 dated 01-07-2016; alleged breach of Section 83(1 to 6) A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, Rule 8 of Rules 2003 and Circular No. 29184 dated 19-09-1984; Article 226 mandamus; interim application under Section 151 CPC (W.P.M.P. No. 35257 of 2016); no merits decided; no precedent cited; Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka; decided 05-03-2025.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed as infructuous, with no order as to costs, the Court recording that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication. ¶26

Urugonda Kanakaratnam Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of the respondents in issuing notice dated 01-07-2016 requiring the petitioner to vacate shop No. 7, Ganesh shopping complex, Kothagudem, and in conducting a tender-cum-public auction of the said shop, without following Circular No. 29184 dated 19-09-1984, Section 83(1 to 6) of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act and Rule 8 of the Rules 2003, is illegal, arbitrary, null and void.

¶17

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is dismissed as infructuous, with no order as to costs, the Court recording that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication.

¶26

Key takeaways

Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 28474 of 2016 (High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad, Nagesh Bheemapaka, J., 05-03-2025): The petitioner, a shop occupant, challenged the action of the Endowments Department respondents in issuing notice R.C.No. 18116 dated 01-07-2016 requiring him to vacate shop No. 7, Ganesh shopping complex, M.G. Road, Kothagudem, Khammam District, and in proposing a tender-cum-public auction of the shop on 24-08-2016 (auction notice dated 11-08-2016 published in Eenadu Telugu daily dated 13-08-2016), alleging violation of Circular No. 29184 dated 19-09-1984, Section 83(1 to 6) of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act and Rule 8 of the Rules 2003, and sought a writ of mandamus. An interim application under Section 151 CPC sought a stay of eviction. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the cause did not survive for adjudication and had become infructuous. Accepting this, the Court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous with no order as to costs and directed that pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand closed. No adjudication was made on the merits of the challenge.

¶1

[³³⁰⁰ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGAI\ih AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF A/ARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 28474 0F 2016

¶7

Between:

¶8

Urugonda Kanakaratnam, S/o. Lq]!e Laxmaiah, Aged 52 years, Occ Business, R/o- Shop !o. 7, Ganesh Temple shopping corirplex, M.G. Road, Kothagudem Town and lr/andal Khamham Distiict-

¶9

AND

¶10

...PET|T!ONER

¶11

1 . The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Endowmeirt Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Commissioner, Endowment Department, Boggulakunta,,Hyderabad

¶13

The Deputy Commissioner, Endowrhent Departme-nt, Warangai, Warangal District.

¶14

The Assistant Commissioner, Endowment Department, Khammam, Khammam District

¶15

The Manager/Executive Officer, Sree Vijay Vigneshwara Swamy Temple, Endowments Department, Kothagudem, Khammam District

¶16

,..RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstancgs stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaiing the action of the Respondents in issuing notice bearing R.C.No. 18116, dated- 01-07-2016 in the name of the 5th respondent to the petitioner herein to vacate the shop No. 7, Ganesh shopping complex, M.G. Road, Kothagudem, Khammam District and thereon to conduct tender-cum-public auction on 24-08-2016 for the same shop published notice dated- 1 1-08-201 6 in District Edition, Khammam, Eenadu Telugu daily news paper, dated 13-08-20.16 is illegal, arbitrary null and void and in violation of circular No. 29184 in (C. No.Jl/78705/83), dated- 19-09-1984 of the' respondents, section 83 (1 to 6) of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious lnstitutions and Endowments Act, 1982 and rule 8 of rules 2003 appended to the Act and consequently set aside the same.

¶18

.J: 1 OF 201_Q( Vt,Pn/lP. NO: 35257 OF 2016)

¶19

Petition unrl,:. Section 1 51 CPC praying that in the circurnslances stated in the affidavit filerl n r; roport of the petition, the High Court may b,:^p leased to direct the respondent:; lrl-':. 1 to 5 not to evict the petitioner from sh,:p No. 7, Ganesh Temple complex \l^(1. Road, Kothagduem, Khammam Distrir:t :nder guise of notice dated: l1- ), -2C 16, tender-cum-public auction notice b,,raring R.C.No. '18l16, dated: 1' -r:)fi j'013 published in Eenadu Telugu daily newrj paper dated: 1308-2016 withou full,r rving the procedure contemplated under ser;tic,n 83 (1 to 6) of the A.P- Charitab,e ir rd liindu Religious lnstitution and Endowmentli Act, 1987 rlw. rule 8 of rules i'O(l l ropended to it and circular No. 29184 in (C.N,r.J1178705/83), dated: 19-09-1984 z|rd applications of the petitioners dated: 16-0i'-2O16 and 1908-2016 as per^ra,v 1 en,Jing disposal of the writ petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petirioner: SRI S.MADAN MOHAN RAO Counsel for the Res;pondent Nos.1 TO 4: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS; Counsel for the Res,grondent No.5: SRI C.H.SATISH KUMAR

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ITAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

¶23

WRIT PETITION No.28474 of 2OL6

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

When the matter has been taken up for hearing, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the cause in the present writ petition does not survive for adjudication and it has become infructuous.

¶26

In view of the same, Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.

¶27

3. Consequently, miscellaneous applications

¶28

pending, if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stald closed

¶29

SD/- P.Ch. NAGABHUSHAM^BA S STANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

1 One CC to SRI S.IMADAN^{IMOHANRAO, Advo} loPU cl 2 Two CCs to GP FOR ENDOWMENTS,^HighCou or the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT] 3. One'CC to SRI -C.H.SATISH KUMAR, Advocate IOPUC]

¶34