ORDER :

R. Raghunandan Rao, J.

1. The case of the petitioners is that they and their forefathers have been Archakas of two temples, known as Sri Vasantha Madhava Swamy Temple and Sri Vasantha Anjaneya Swamy Temple, situated at Puslur Village, Nandyal Mandal, Kurnool District. It is their case that the petitioners and their forefathers had been rendering Archakatvam service in these two temples and had been granted certain Inam lands for their livelihood. It is further submitted that these lands, shown to be in the names of the temples, were being held by the hereditary Archakas only.

2. It is the case of the petitioners that the 4th respondent had issued a public auction notice dated 24.03.2018 behind their back for the auction of the temples' Inam lands, admeasuring Ac.55.61 cents in Sy. Nos. 89, 172, 214, 270, 269/3F of Puslur Village, Nandyal Mandal, even though the lands were held by the petitioners and their forefathers as an Inam lands, given to them for performing Archaka service in the aforesaid temples. They would rely on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in A.S. Narayana Deekshitulu v. State of A.P., AIR 1996 SC 1756 and A.S. Narayana Deekshitulu v. State of A.P., AIR 1997 SC 3702 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court had directed that the temples with an annual income of less than Rs.5,00,000/- should be allowed to be managed as before and the earlier system of granting the land for the purpose of services in the temples should be continued.

3. The prayer sought in the writ petition is for a declaration that leasing out of the agricultural lands of the temples, by the 3rd and 4th respondents, is in violation of the provisions of Sections 29 and 144 of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short 'the Act') and in violation of the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in A.S. Narayana Deekshitulu (2 supra) and for a consequential direction to the respondents to handover the subject agricultural lands along with the lease amounts obtained from these lands to the petitioners.

4. The 4th respondent has filed a counter affidavit. In this counter affidavit, the 4th respondent does not dispute the fact that the forefathers of the petitioners had served as Archakas. However, the 4th respondent states that the petitioners have not served as Archakas of the temples for the last 10 to 15 years and that the 1st and 4th petitioners are employees of Central/State Government and are enjoying the entire extent of Ac.55.61 cents by appointing a proxy Archaka, who is their relative, to perform pooja in the 4th respondent-temple. It is stated that the villagers had complained about the manner in which the Archakatvam service is being performed in the temples and in view of the said complaints, it was decided to auction the leasehold rights of the lands of the temples and the Inspector of Endowments, Adoni, had supervised such an auction proceedings, which was held on 24.03.2018.

5. It is stated that the lease amounts obtained by way of such auction proceedings amounted to Rs.5,18,000/-, were deposited with the Indian Bank main branch, Kurnool. Thereafter, a new Archaka was appointed as temporary Archaka on payment of Rs.10,000/- per month and the said person is being continued as of now.

6. The sum and substance of the contention of the 4th respondent is that since the petitioners are not carrying on Archakatvam service, they would not be entitled to retain the land as payment of salary for the service rendered by them. The 4th respondent, to demonstrate the aforesaid contentions, had taken the plea that the Code numbers given to Sri Vasantha Madhava Swamy Temple and Sri Vasantha Anjaneya Swamy Temples were 327414 and 327413, while the petitioners, in their affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, had given the code numbers of these temples as 131801613347 and 131801615792.

7. The petitioners in their reply affidavit have stated that the temple code numbers were taken from the website