JUDGMENT :

M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J.

1. As the specific contention of the petitioners in all the writ petitions is one and the same, we find it to expedient to decide all the writ petitions by common order. For convenience sake, the Writ Petition No. 40252 of 2015 is taken as lead petition.

2. The Writ Petition No. 40252 of 2015 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of mandamus to declare the G.O. Ms. No. 426 Revenue (Endowments-I) Department, dated 9.11.2015 issued by the respondent No. 1 i.e., State of Andhra Pradesh incorporating Rule 4(2) and Rule 18 of A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Immovable Properties and Other Rights (other than Agricultural Lands) Leases and Licenses Rules, 2003, prohibiting non-Hindus in participation of tender-cum-auction process of shops or otherwise to obtain lease or license to carry on business in immovable property belonging to respondent No. 3-temple, as bad, illegal, arbitrary, opposed to law and violative of Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India.

3. The petitioners were inducted as tenants in various shops, plots belonging to respondent No. 3-temple and carrying on their business in sale of different items near temple premises. While the petitioners carrying on business, the respondent No. 1 issued G.O. Ms. No. 426, Revenue (Endowments-I) Department, dated 9.11.2015, whereby A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Immovable Properties and Other Rights (other than Agricultural Lands) Leases and Licenses Rules, 2003 (for short "the Rules, 2003"), framed in G.O. Ms. No. 866, Revenue (Endowments-I) Department, dated 8.8.2003, were amended by incorporating Rule 4(2) and Rule 18, which prohibits the persons professing other than Hinduism as their religion to obtain lease or licence either participating in tender process or otherwise.

4. On account of amendment, the petitioners are being deprived of their source of livelihood, as they are solely depending upon the income derived from the business being carried on, in the premises or plots belonging to respondent No. 3-temple, for the last more than 40 to 50 years. As per the procedure adopted by the respondents, the petitioners agreed to pay rent/license fee at the enhanced rate at 33.5% for every 3 years, the rent was enhanced for some commercial premises and for the other premises in 2014 by proceedings issued by the Commissioner of Endowments, respondent No. 2 herein. The leases of all the petitioners were expired by 31.12.2015.

5. On the complaint of Smt. N. Prabhavathi dated 11.8.2014, the Commissioner of Endowments issued proceedings dated 23.5.2015, directing the Executive Officer to take possession of all shops and prohibiting them to participate in public auctions for granting licenses to carry on business in shops belonging to Devastanam in future. The proceedings issued by the respondent No. 2 debarring from participating in auction is an act of discrimination between Hindus and Non-Hindus. The proceedings issued by the Commissioner, respondent No. 2 herein dated 23.5.2015 is the subject-matter in WPMP No. 29088 of 2015 and WPMP No. 29089 of 2015 dated 21.7.2015, whereby the proceedings were suspended during pendency of the writ petition. Thus, the petitioners are continuing in possession and enjoyment of the property as tenants without any interruption or hindrance.

6. A similar exercise was undertaken while auctioning two shops belonging to the respondent No. 3 Devastanam in Kurnool by referring to a G.O., i.e., G.O. Ms. No. 8339, which is a preliminary notification prior to issuance of the impugned G.O., which prevented non-Hindus to participate in the public auction. The said auction notification debarring to participate in public auction is the subject-matter in WP No. 36409 of 2015, the High Court permitted the petitioners in the said writ petition, to continue in possession on paying the highest bid amount as interim order, prima facie