The court clarified that continuous possession for six years prior to the Act's commencement is essential for claiming benefits under Section 82 of the Act.

ORDER :

As the issue involved in all the writ petitions is one and the same, and therefore, they are being taken up for hearing as well as disposed of by way of this Common Order.

2. Since the facts in all the writ petitions are similar and identical, therefore WP No.47 of 2015 is taken as lead case, and the facts therein hereinafter will be referred to for convenience.

3. Brief facts of the case are that, all petitioners are Land Less Poor persons and their elders were given lease hold rights by the then management of the 4th respondent temple. Since then i.e., for the past 60 years, their families have been cultivating the lands belonging to the 4th respondent temple for their livelihood. This fact is not disputed by the authorities. Due to poverty and illiteracy the petitioners’ elders have not availed the benefit given under Section 82 of Act 30 of 1987. Some of the petitioners herein were served with Form-I notice in the year 2003. Aggrieved with the same, they have filed WP No.15752 of 2003 before the composite High Court at Hyderabad and the same was disposed of directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners in the light of Section 82 of the Act. Till the decision is taken, status quo was also ordered. In pursuance of the same, the officers took details from the petitioners with a letter to extend the benefit under Section 82 of the Act declaring the petitioners as landless poor persons. But no action has been taken by the respondents so far. Accordingly, the petitioners made several requests. Though the petitioners are entitled to purchase the land which they have hold and cultivate as stipulated under Section 82 of the Act, to protect their continuous possession they were forced to participate in public auction conducted by the 4^th respondent temple for every 3 years. All the years the petitioners are participating in auctions and they were also extended the lease period for 2013-2014 on condition of giving 23 bags of rice per Acre and accordingly the petitioners have given the same and sought for further extension. While the matter stood thus, surprisingly the authorities have issued proceedings vide L.DS.No.2/14931/2014, dated 28.06.2014 rejecting the request of the petitioners and further directing the 4^th respondent to conduct public auction as per G.O.Ms.No379 dated 11.03.2003, which is illegal and arbitrary. Hence the present writ petition.

4. This Court, vide order, dated 07.01.2015,in WP No.47 of 2015, has granted status quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained by both the parties, for a period of three weeks. Thereafter, the same is being extended from time to time.

5. The pleadings which are cited by the petitioners in W.P.No.47 of 2015, the same are adopted by the other petitioners in other writ petitions i.e., WP Nos.7666 of 2015 and 19483 of 2014.

6. The counter affidavits have been filed in all the Writ Petitions.

7. In the Counter affidavit filed by the 2^nd respondent in WP No.47 of 2015, while denying all the allegations made in the petitions, inter alia, it is stated that, the Executive officer of the 4^th respondent temple issued notification dated 30.06.2014 for conducting of public auction of the lease hold rights of wet land in various survey numbers of Mannava Village admeasuring Ac. 19.85 cents in 14 bits and the auction was scheduled to be held on 14.07.2014 and 15.07.2014. Questioning the said auction notice, the petitioners herein approached this Hon'ble High Court by way of W.P.No.19483/2014 claiming that they are small farmers under entitled for protection under Section 82(2) of the A.P. Charitable & Hindu Religious I