( 1 ) THE petitioner filed a suit being O. S. No. 1451 of 2003 on the file of the court of principal Junior Civil Judge, Tirupati for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 24-3-2003 against one G. Subbamma. The petitioner alleges that the vendor subsequently brought into existence an unregistered gift deed in favour of Tirumala tirupati Devasthanams (TTD), first respondent herein so as to defeat the rights of the petitioner under the said agreement. The first respondent effected the sale of the property by public auction in Eenadu daily dated 14-10-2003. The auction was conducted on 22-10-2003 and was knocked down in favour of second respondent. The petitioner filed the present writ petition challenging the action of the first respondent in conducting public auction to sell away immovable property without prior sanction of the Commissioner of Endowments under sec. 80 of the Andhra Predesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and endowments Act (hereafter referred to as the act ), as illegal and arbitrary.

( 2 ) AT the admission stage, the first respondent has filed a counter affidavit denying the averments made in the petitioner s affidavit. It is stated that the petitioner already filed a suit before the Civil court, the writ petition is not maintainable. TTD is a Special Religious Institution which is governed by the provisions contained in chapter XIV of the Act as well as the rules promulgated vide G. O. Ms. No 311 dated 9-4-1990. By reasons of these provisions, section 80 of the Act has no application to ttd. Further it is stated that by resolution 214 dated 6-7-2001, the Board of Trustees delegated powers to the Executive Officer to accept and to dispose of the immovable valued not exceeding Rs. 20. 00 lakhs. Before accepting the gift made by G. Subbamma, objections and suggestions were invited by publishing a notice in Telugu daily andhra jyothi dated 8-7-2003. The petitioner had not submitted any objections before the stipulated time. Therefore, the first respondent accepted the gift on 21-9-2003. Thereafter, the property was sold in public auction wherein the second respondent became the highest bidder at rs. 2,71,000/ -. The second respondent paid Rs. 1,28,000. 00 and time was extended for payment of balance amount of rs. 1,43,000/ -. After the amount is paid, the building will be handed over to the second respondent. It is also stated that as per rules framed by the Government vide g. O. Ms. No. 311, it is for the Board of trustees to decide either to sell or exchange or mortgage of properties of TTD and the commissioner of Endowments is not competent to sanction such sale.

( 3 ) THE learned counsel for petitioner sri K. S. Gopalakrishnan vehemently contends that as per Section 80, any alienation of immovable property belonging to Charitable for Religious Institution or endowments shall be null and void unless it is effected with prior sanction of the commissioner. He would also submit that section 80 prescribes elaborate procedure to be followed before the Commissioner accords sanction for such sale, gift, exchange or mortgage of immovable properties. Further even after conducting public auction, the same cannot be confirmed unless the Commissioner passes an order confirming such sale. Learned counsel would submit that the first respondent has flouted this procedure and therefore auction conducted by the TTD in favour of the second respondent is unsustainable.

( 4 ) PER contra, Sri. M. Adinarayana Raju, learned counsel for TTD relies on the provisions of Sections 95, 97,111,108,119 in Chapter XIV of the Act as well as the rules containing in Chapter XXII of the rules vide G. O. Ms. No. 311 to contend that Sec. 80 has no application to the TTD and therefore the auction conducted by TTD is valid.

( 5 ) TTD was brought under Charitable and hindu Religious Institutions and endowments Act, 1951, which was passed by Madras Legislature. Thereafter when law was consolidated by Andhra Pra