ORDER :

Sri Nandikunta Vigneswara Swamy Temple, situated in Nadendla Village and Mandal, Guntur District, is being presently managed by the petitioners. The forefathers of the petitioners had been given Ac.1.00 cents of land, by way of a Registered Gift Deed, dated 03.01.1940, for the purpose of maintaining the subject temple, and the same was carried out earlier by the forefathers of the petitioners and subsequently, the petitioners themselves.

2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the proceedings of the Commissioner, Endowments, who is arrayed as the 2nd respondent, in Rc.No.J1/350/2021, dated 29.04.2021, directing the publication of the temple as a Hindu Religious Institution under Section 6(c)(ii) of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short, “the Act”). These proceedings also directed the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments, Guntur to take necessary action for registration of the temple under section 43 of the Act, and for submission of proposals for entering the property of this Institution in the register under Section 22-A(1)(c) of Registration Act.

3. The objection to the said order is twofold. Firstly, it is contended that the temple has no property and the lands being claimed, as the property of the Temple, have been gifted to the forefathers of the Petitioners and consequently they are the owners of the lands, as such the lands cannot be registered in the name of the Temple and further the exercise is a malafide exercise being carried out for extraneous. Secondly, the procedure adopted by the 2nd respondent in directing publication of the temple under Section 6(c)(ii) of the Act, without any notice to the petitioners and without registering the temple under Section 43 of the Act, is in violation of the principles of natural justice as well as the provisions of the Act, itself.

4. Sri V.Venu Gopala Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has made submissions on the impermissibility of registering or publishing the Temple under the Act as the said temple is more in the nature of a private temple and is being effectively managed by the petitioners and the impugned proceedings are more on account of pressure from local people for extraneous purposes.

5. Sri V.Venu Gopala Rao, would further submit, without prejudice to his first contention, that the procedure evolved by the 2nd respondent is in direct contravention of the provisions of the Act, as well as principles of natural justice. He relies upon the Judgment of the erstwhile High Court of A.P in V.V.V.R.K.Yachendra Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh.,, 1987 (1) ALT 256 and this Court in W.P.No 21986 of 2021 dated 05.10.2021, wherein it was held that publication of any religious endowments under Section 6 of the Act can be done only after notice is given to the persons under the management of the said temple or endowment. As no notice has been given to the petitioners, who are in management of the temple, the impugned proceedings would have to be set aside on this short ground.

6. Sri V. Venu Gopala Rao, also contends that any attempt to register a temple or religious endowment or for that matter any charitable institution requires the institution to be first registered under Section 43 of the Act. After such registration, an assessment of the income of the institution has to be done under Section 65 of the Act. Thereafter, the institution is to be published under the relevant category of Section 6 of the Act, depending upon the ascertained income of the Institution. As this has not been done, the impugned proceedings would have to be set aside.

7. The respondents have filed a counter wherein it is stated that the impugned proceedings had been issued after a detailed report was obtained from the Inspector, Endowments department wherein complaints were being received from the villagers that the present management of the temple have been misusing the donations being received by the temple. However, there is no dispute that the