Disputes regarding title over land belonging to charitable institutions must be addressed by the Endowments Tribunal, making writ petitions under Article 226 not maintainable.

ORDER :

The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

“…..to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the Notice dt. 23.10.2024 issued by the 6^th respondent U/s 83(2) of A.P. Charitable Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and violative of Article 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to change the entries in ROR in relation to 1^st petitioner property in Sy.No.211-2 to an extent of Ac.2.23 cents situated in Nimmalakunta Village, H/o Pothulanagelapalli Villag Fields bounded East: Road towards Puttaparthi, South: Housing Corporation limited, west: Land in Sy.No.211, North: Madapuram Road (60 feet road), Dharmavaram Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District….”

2. Brief facts of the case are that the 1^st petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of agriculture land in Survey No.211-2 to an extent of Ac.2.23 cents situated in Nimmalakunta Village, Pothulanagelapalli village fields (for short “subject property”) vide DAR Dis.No.13/1414, dated 16.07.2004. The father of the 2^nd petitioner constructed a small temple “Sri Veeranjaneya Swamy Devasthanam” in the year 1970 at Medapuram Cross, Nimmalakunta Village, Dharmavaram Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District and the same was maintained by him during his life time. After the death of 2^nd petitioner‟s father, the 2^nd petitioner is managing the affairs and activities of the temple. While things stood thus, the 7^th respondent tried to interfere with the enjoyment and possession of the lands of the 2^nd petitioner. Hence, the 2^nd petitioner filed W.P.No.41145 of 2018 challenging the open auction for selling of coconuts and pooja material and also for supply of utilities and lighting decoration on lease basis on 16.11.2018 by the 7^th respondent without procedure contemplated under the law without publishing the temple in the list of charitable and religious institutions and endowments and the same is pending. While things stood thus, the 6^th respondent issued notice to the petitioner under Section 83 (2) of Act 30/87, dated 23.10.2024 asking to explain within seven days from the date of notice, why action should not be treated against him as an encroacher under Section 83 of Act 30/87; failing which, appropriate action will be taken as per the provisions of Section 83 of Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Religious Institutions and Endowments Act (Act 30/87). The 2^nd petitioner issued reply dated 16.10.2024 to the impugned notice dated 23.10.2024 duly stating that the impugned notice is not in proper form and is with improper details and he is not an encroacher under Section 83 of the Act 30/87. Aggrieved by the action of the 6^th respondent in issuing notice dated 23.10.2024, the present writ petition has been filed.

3. Heard Mr.O.Uday Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments, for respondent Nos.1 to 4 as well as learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent No.5.

4. On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents urged in the writ petition, submits that, the 2^nd petitioner renovated the temple by selling his properties and living his life looking after the affairs of the temple. He further submits that, in the year 1993 “Nagalakatta” was built by the 2^nd petitioner in the temple premises and after renovation, the 2^nd petitioner started to conduct “Annadanam” every second Saturday of the month and performing festivals every year as “Uttlaparusha”. He further submits that the 2^nd petitioner looking after the shrines of his parents and affairs of the temple, which is situated at Medapuram Crooss, Nimmalakunta Village, Dharmavaram Mandal, Sri Satya Sai district. He further submits that the petitioners are in continuous possession and enjoyment of the land vide D-Form land duly raisi