G. YETHIRAJULU, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a writ of Mandamus filed by 20 petitioners under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying to issue a direction to the respondents not to evict them from the lands of the 2nd respondent in which they are in possession as cultivating tenants and to strike down section 6 of the A. P. Charitable and Hindu religious Institutions and Endowments (Amendment) Act, 2002 (Act 27 of 2002) (hereinafter referred to as act 27 of 2002 for the sake of brevity) and Section 3 of the A. P. Tenancy Laws (Amendment) Act, 2002 (Act no. 28 of 2002) (hereinafter referred to as act 28 of 2002) as illegal, unconstitutional and arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

( 2 ) THE averments of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition are briefly as follows:

( 3 ) THE second respondent is a charitable institution. It is the absolute owner of ac. 119-84 cents of land situated in Virivada village and Ac. 2-24 cents in fakruddinpalem Village of Pithapuram mandal, East Godavari District. The petitioners and their predecessors have been continuing as cultivating tenants for the said land of an extent of Ac. 122-08 cents for the last several decades. In the year 1958 a registered lease deed covered by document no. 820 of 1958 dated 26-4-1958 was taken from the petitioners and or the predecessors in interest belonging to 16 families. By virtue of the provisions of the A. P. (Andhra Area) tenancy Act, 1956 ( the Principal Act for brevity) and the Amended Act 30 of 1974 they became statutory tenants. By virtue of section 10 of the Amended Act 30 of 1974, which came into force on 1-7-1980, their tenancy became perpetual. While so, the a. P. Charitable and Hindu Religious institutions and Endowments Act, 1966 ( 1966 Act for brevity) was repealed and the new Act of 1987 came into force on 28-5-1987 and in the new Act, for cancellation of all leases of agricultural lands belonging to or endowed for the purpose of any institution or endowment subsisting on the date of commencement of the Act, Section 82 (1) was introduced. Several writ petitions were filed challenging the constitutional validity of section 82 of the said Act. A learned single judge of this Court struck down Sec. 82 (2) of the Endowments Act, 1987. A Division bench of this Court through its judgment dated 3-10-1989 struck down the entire section 82 holding that the provisions incorporated therein are violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India. The State of andhra Pradesh carried the matter to hon ble Supreme Court of India. A Division bench of the Supreme Court in State of andhra Pradesh v. Nallamilli Kami Reddy reversed the Division Bench judgment of this Court and upheld the validity of Sec. 82 of the Endowments Act, 1987. The petitioners further pleaded that the Supreme court while upholding the validity of section 82 of the Endowments Act, 1987 observed as follows:. . . that the undertaking given to the court while the writ proceedings were pending, no steps would be taken for evicting the tenants holding the lands at present, until appropriate Rules are framed shall be binding on the appellants and will hold good even now.

( 4 ) SUBSEQUENTLY the first respondent brought out two amendments to Section 82 of the Endowments Act, 1987 viz. , Act 27 of 2002 and Sections 16 and 18 of the Tenancy act i. e. , Act 28 of 2002. The two amendments made to the two enactments offend the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India as they are violative of equality clause and equal protection of laws. They also discriminate between same class of tenants who are all conferred permanent tenancy rights long back in 1980. Hence, the amendments have to be declared as unconstitutional and are liable to be struck down.

( 5 ) THE first respondent filed a counter-affidavit resisting the writ petition and the averments of the counter-affidavit are briefly as under:

( 6 ) IN the State of Andhra Pradesh many religious institutions p

Click Here to Read the rest of this document