The Executive Officer’s action against encroachers on temple property was within jurisdiction under the Endowments Act, with disputes over land title to be determined by the Endowment Tribunal.

Judgment :

R. Raghunandan Rao, J.

1. Heard Sri V. Venugopal Rao, the learned Senior Counsel represented on behalf of Sri Devi Subhasini Anne, learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Government Pleader for Endowments, appearing for the respondents.

2. As these two appeals arise out of a common order, dated 21.08.2025, in W.P.No.15005 of 2025 and W.P.No.15006 of 2025, they are being disposed of by way of this common order.

3. The Executive Officer, of the appellant herein, had issued two separate orders, dated 09.06.2025, informing the petitioner in W.P.No.15005 of 2025 that he was in unauthorized occupation of Ac.0.90 cents of land in Survey No.635 of Markapuram village, as an encroacher, and to remove such encroachment, within 15 days of the receipt of the order, failing which due process of law, as contemplated under Section 83(3) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowment Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act 30 of 1987'), for removal of the encroachment and possession would be taken. Similarly, the petitioner in W.P.No.15006 of 2025 was issued a notice dated 09.06.2025 informing him that he was in unauthorized occupation of Ac.0.62 cents of land in Survey No.635 of Markapuram village, as an encroacher,, and to remove such encroachment, within 15 days of the receipt of the order, failing which due process of law, as contemplated under Section 83(3) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowment Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act 30 of 1987'), for removal of the encroachment and possession would be taken. These proceedings were initiated and passed on the ground that, the land which was the subject matter of the above proceedings, was part of an extent of Ac.3.80 cents of land, in Sy.No.635 of Markapuram Town, which is Inam land meant for “Thulasi Pushpamula Noukari Services”, of the appellant temple, and that this property was registered under Section 38 of the Endowments Act 17 of 1966 and also under Section 43 of the Endowments Act 30 of 1987.

4. The petitioners challenged these proceedings, by way of W.P.No.1005 and 1006 of 2025, before this Court. A learned Sigle Judge of this Court, by an order dated 21.08.2025, allowed these Writ Petitions by setting aside the proceedings of 09.06.2025. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant is before this Court, by way of the present Writ Appeals.

5. The case of the petitioners, in the Writ Petitions, was that Inam lands, claimed by temples, religious institutions and other institutions, under the provisions of Act 30 of 1987, would be governed by Section 75 to 77 of the said Act and the authority, who could take action under these provisions was the Revenue Divisional Officer. It is stated that the authorities under the Endowment Act, 1987 are barred from taking any action under these provisions. Apart from this, no action can be initiated under Section 83 of the Endowments Act of 1987, as it is the provisions of Section 75 to 77 which would be applicable in the present case.

6. The learned Single Judge accepted the stand of the petitioners, in the Writ Petitions, that it is only the provisions of Section 75 to 77 that would be applicable and consequently the proceedings, dated 09.06.2025, passed under Section 83(2) of the Endowments Act, 1987 was without jurisdiction.

7. Before going into the applicability of these provisions, it is necessary to notice the stand of the petitioners, in both the Writ petitions. The petitioners, in both the Writ Petitions contend that the land in question is private patta land and that the land is not Inam land. The petitioners also contend that their title is traced, independent of the title of the