The petitioner challenges the proceedings, dated 29.04.2004, issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Kothavalasa, the 2nd respondent herein.

The facts, that gave rise to the filing of the writ petition, are as under:

The petitioner-Temple held various extents of land in different survey numbers of Kothavalasa. One such item is, the land in survey No.7, admeasuring Acs.15.04 cents. The Government initiated action for acquisition of the said land to provide house sites to the flood victims of Veerasagaram Tank of Kothavalasa Village. The Commissioner of Endowments gave consent for acquisition. When the proposals were in progress, the 3rd respondent filed W.P.No.35480 of 1998, before this Court, claiming that he is entitled to be paid the compensation. The writ petition was dismissed on 16.04.2003, leaving it open to the 3rd respondent to file a suit.

Thereafter, the 3rd respondent filed Rev.W.P.M.P.No.9610 of 2003. An order, dated 06.01.2004, was passed by this Court, directing that the revenue authorities, i.e. the District Collector, Vizianagaram, and the Mandal Revenue Officer, shall conduct enquiry, based upon the entries made in the registers, maintained by the Endowments Department, under Section 43 of the A.P.Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short ‘the Endowments Act’), and come to a conclusion, with regard to the claim of the petitioner therein. It is in this context, that the 2nd respondent conducted enquiry and passed the impugned order. He held that the land in survey No.7/1 admeasuring Acs.15.04 cents of Kothavalasa was not gifted or endowed to the petitioner-Temple and that the 3rd respondent is the rightful owner and possessor of the land. After the impugned order was passed, the 3rd respondent executed two sale deeds in favour of respondents 4 and 5, in respect of the land, on 15.07.2004. In addition to challenging the impugned order, relief is also sought, vis-à-vis those sale deeds.

The petitioner contends that the impugned order is totally without jurisdiction and is not referable to any provision of law. It is urged that, by no stretch of imagination, this Court can be said to have conferred such a power to the 2nd respondent, and the only forum to decide such question is the one, constituted under Section 87 of the Endowments Act, or a civil Court, in the event of the land being acquired under the Land Acquisition Act.

Respondents 3, 4 and 5 have filed separate counter-affidavits supporting the impugned proceedings. It is stated that the order passed by this Court in Rev.W.P.M.P., has become final, and that the impugned proceedings are issued in accordance with the same.

Heard Sri V.T.M. Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Endowments, learned Government Pleader for Revenue, Sri V.L.N.G.K.Murthy, learned counsel for the 3rd respondent, and Sri A.S.C.Bose, learned counsel for respondents 4 and 5.

It is a matter of record that the petitioner was granted ryotwari patta, bearing No.489, in respect of Acs.15.04 cents of land, in survey No.7/1 of Kothavalasa Village, under the A.P.(A.A.) Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956 (for short ‘the Inams Act’). The revenue authorities of the District approached the petitioner with a request to part with the land, on payment of compensation, for the purpose of providing house sites for the flood victims. The Commissioner of Endowments accorded permission, and steps were in progress, for determination of compensation, and payment thereof. At that stage, the 3rd respondent approached this Court by filing W.P.No.35480 of 1998. The writ petition was dismissed on 16.04.2003, leaving it open to him to file a suit for declaration of his title. In a review petition filed by the 3rd respondent, this Court observed that the entries made by the Endowments Department under Section 43 of the Endowments Act, are at variance with those in the adangals, and in that view of the matt