Back
B. KRISHNA MOHAN
Vaka Raghava Reddy, S/o. Ramakrishna Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department – Respondent
ORDER :
(B. Krishna Mohan, J.)
Heard.
2) BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:
- Vaka Venkata Reddy (Ancestor and Predecessor in title of the Writ Petitioners) being a devotee of the 5th Respondent Temple (Sri Sitarama Swamy Temple), had purchased agricultural land to an extent of Ac.29-95 cents situated in Survey No. 223 of Karumanchi Village, Prakasam District under a registered sale deed dated 25-11-1862 with the object of utilising the income arising out of the said property for “Kalyanotsavams and Kainkaryams” taking place in the said temple.
-The present Writ Petitioners are the successors of Late Sri Vaka Venkata Reddy.
-The hereditary trustees of the temple represented by P. Venkataraya Sarma, filed two applications in O.A. Nos. 72 and 73 of 1964 before the Deputy Commissioner under Section 57 & 77 of the A.P. Charitable and Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966 questioning the Vaka Family as hereditary trustees for the specific endowment and their exclusive right to perform Kalyanostavam and receive traditional temple honours on such occasions. The Deputy Commissioner upheld the rights of the members of the Vaka Family to perform the said rituals.
- Aggrieved by the said order
The court affirmed the petitioners' rights as hereditary trustees to manage the specific endowment, emphasizing the need for compliance with statutory accounting requirements and the proper procedure....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the inalienability of specifically endowed properties for religious purposes and the bar on alienation of Trust property under the TNHR&CE Act, 195....
The court affirmed the hereditary trusteeship of defendants, ruling that plaintiffs failed to prove mismanagement or entitlement to non-hereditary trusteeship under the Hindu Religious Charitable End....
The court established that the Commissioner of Endowments lacked jurisdiction to revoke exemptions and appoint trustees without following due process as mandated by the Endowments Act.
An exchange deed executed by alleged trustees of a deity without proper authority is valid under current jurisdictional provisions; the High Court's review is limited to substantial questions of law ....
The duty of the Executive Officer to protect the temple's property and the entitlement of the temple in case of mismanagement were central legal principles established in the judgment.
Hereditary trusteeship is not property within the meaning of Art. 19 (1) and Art. 31 of the Constitution of India and consequently the right of hereditary trusteeship is not property within the meani....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
