( 1 ) IN this writ petition by Ashurkhana Nalsahabgadda at Sangareddy and four others, the acquisition of an extent of Ac. 1-3 guntas of land in Survey No. 186 of Sangareddy is impugned on the ground that the land proposed to be acquired being a service Inam land granted to petitioners 2 to 4 and others for services to be rendered to the Ashurkhana, the first petitioner herein, and having been also registered as Wakf property, the acquisition infringes the fundamental rights guaranteed under Arts. 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India. The further ground of attack on this acquisition is that for providing house-sites, which is the avowed public purpose sought to be achieved by this acquisition, the petitioners and their shareholders are being deprived of their only source of livelihood and they are rendered landless, thus defeating public purpose sought to be achieved.

( 2 ) THE petitioners averred in paragraph 2 of the affidavit that Ac. 1-3 guntas in Survey No. 186 is granted as Mafi Inam and a Muntakaab No. 13870 of 1299 Hizri (1878 A. D.) was issued to the petitioners ancestors on condition of rendering service to the Asurkhana Nalsahabgadda Sangareddy. According to him, their lands are Mashruthual Qidmatt Inam and that the petitioner and others have been rendering service to the said Ashurkhana. There are in all 277 persons who have a share in the said Inam land. Their right to the property is recognised by the Atiyat Department of the then Nizam Government of Hyderabad under Order No. 5243 dated 30 Amardad 1341 Fasli. The proceedings of the office of the Inspector, Wakf Board, Medak District copy of which is filed along with the writ petition, shows that this land is also registered as Wakf property. The respondents too, in the counter-affidavit, have not categorically denied that this land is service Inam land granted for the purpose of rendering service to the Ashurkhana Nalsahabgadda, Sangareddy. We have therefore, no hesitation in accepting that the land under acquisition is service Inam land.

( 3 ) THE contention of the petitioners, however, that service Inam land or Wakf property endowed for the purpose of Ashurkana cannot be acquired and such acquisition violates the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India to religious denomination, however, cannot be accepted. So far as Article 25 is concerned, it merely guarantees freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice and propagate religion. It does not specifically deal with the rights of a religious denomination to own or acquire any property. Article 26 (c) however, vests every religious denomination or any section thereof with a right to own and acquire movable and immovable properties and to administer such property in accordance with law. That is governed by Article 26, which reads as follows:"26. Subject to public order, morality and health, every religious denomination or any section thereof shall have the right, (a) to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes; (b) (c) to manage its own affairs in matters of religion. (d) (e) To own and acquire movable and immovable property; and (f) (g) To administer such property in accordance with law. "it would be seen that in compulsorily acquiring the property, the ownership of the property under acquisition is not sought to be questioned. While vesting a right in religious denomination to own and acquire property, Art. 26 makes the administration of such property subject to the law. Of course, any such law cannot affect the right to own or acquire property as such. That Article, however, does not, in any manner, deal with the right of the State to acquire the property for a public purpose. Although the learned Counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the decisions of the supreme Court in Commr. Hindu Religious Endowments v. L. T. Swamiar AIR 1954 SC 282, Sarup Singh v. State of Punjab AIR 1959 SC 860, Dur