The special provisions of the Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966, override the general provisions of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, regarding the termination of tenancies of religious or charitable institutions.

( 1 ) THIS writ appeal is filed by the joint Commissioner in Endowments department, the 1st respondent in W. P. No. 965 of 72. The writ petition came to be filed in the following circumstances; the writ petitioner carries on business of selling coconuts, fruits, flowers betel leaves to the pilgrims, in the premises no. 7/144 on the pial covering an area of 96 sq. feet on the Northern side of rajagopuram of Sri Ksheera Ramalingeswara Swamivari Temple. The petitioner s father originally was inducted into this piemiseson a monthly rental of rs. 21- but, from 1-5-1969, the rent was enhanced to Rs. 28/- per month. The temple authorities initiated proceedings, H. R. C. No. 28/52, to evict the petitioner under Sec 7 of the Madras buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) control Act. That petition however, was dismissed. The petitioner continued to occupy the premises. Nothing trans pired till 1969 and in that year the petitioner executed a lease for one year, which expired on 1-6-1970. It is urged, on behalf of the appellant, that after the expiry of the lease period, no further lease was granted in favour of the petitioner by the temple authorities and they have also not received any rents from the petitioner from September, 1970. The petitioner, \ however instituted A. B. O. P. No. 56/70 and deposited the rent.

( 2 ) THE Deputy Commissioner, endowments, on 21-5-1970 issued notice in O. A. No. 102 of 1970 A. 4/judl. under sec. 75 (2) of the Andhra Pradesh charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act (No. 17 of of 1966) in which it was alleged, the petitioner was "encroacher and was asked to show cause why he should not be evicted. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 15-6-1970. In that, he raised the objection that the Deputy commissioner had no authority to evict the Writ petitioner from the premises and without waiting for the orders of the Deputy Commissioner he approached this court in W. P. No. 252/70 and challenged the jurisdiction of the authorities. The writ petition was dismissed and it was observed, the petitioner had , effective remedies under Act 17 of 1966 and he did not exhaust them. That order was confirmed in appeal. s.

( 3 ) THE petitioner thereafter appea- shalled before the Deputy Commissioner v and led evidence in the proceedings. The Deputy Commissioner, on a consideration of the circumstances, by his order on 19-12-1970, held the writ petitioner was an "encroacher" and directec him to vacate the premises. The ordei was assailed unsuccessfully by the petitioner in revision in R. P. No. 6/71 under Section 82 of the Act, before the joint Commissioner. That order of the joint Commissioner was quashed by the learned Single Judge on the ground". . . . . . the (writ) petitioner is a tenant holding over (in the premises) in which case, the deputy Commissioner has no jurisdiction to invoke the provisions of Sec. 75 of the Act and the notice given by him under Sec. 75 (2) of the Act is clearly without jurisdiction". It was further held. . . . . . . . . "it cannot be said that Sec. 75 is a complete code in itself and its provisions exclude the operation of the provisions of the Transfer of Property act".

( 4 ) THE learned Govt. pleader for the appellant submits, the provisions in chapters XI of Act 17 of 1966 are special provisions and exclude the provisions jf the TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882. The drovisions in that chapter is a. local law is contemplated by the Transfer of Pro Derty Act and no termination notice mder Section 106 of the Transfer of Pro- > erty Act, is required to be given, as hat section does not apply to leases he Hindu Religious Institutions and indowments. Chapter XI consists of Sections 75 nd 76. They deal with removal of ncroachments. Sec. 75 reads as follows: "75 Encroachments by persons on land or building belonging to charitable or religious institution or endowment and the eviction of encroachment (1 ). where the Assistant Commissioner having jurisdiction, ei