The Endowments Act governs temple lands, excluding Tenancy Act protections, and eviction proceedings are valid against encroachers without established title claims.

JUDGMENT:

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the appellants- respondent Nos.3 to 6 aggrieved by the orders dated 06.06.2017 passed in O.A No.368 of 2010 (Old O.A No.119 of 2007) by the Telangana Endowments Tribunal, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred as ‘Tribunal’).

2. The respondent Nos.1 and 2 are the applicants. The parties are hereinafter referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal.

3. The applicants filed the O.A. under Section 83(1) of A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short ‘the Act’) against the respondent Nos.1 and 2 initially to declare them as encroachers and for their eviction.

4. The case of the applicants was that Sri Anantha Padmanabha Swamy Temple was situated at Attapur Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and its affairs were being managed by the Manager. The institution was under the control of the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, Ranga Reddy District. The Inspector, Endowments Department, during his visit came to know that the respondent Nos.1 and 2 had illegally encroached the premises of the above temple. The Manager of the temple issued a notice to respondent Nos.1 and 2 with a direction to vacate the endowment land in Sy.Nos.435 and 446 to an extent of Acs.4.26 gts. The respondent Nos.1 and 2 neither paid the rents nor vacated the premises. As such, gave a report to the Assistant Commissioner of Endowments Department to initiate proposals under the prescribed proforma under Section 83 of the Act.

4.1 The respondent Nos.1 and 2 filed counter contending that the schedule property was not an Endowment property and did not belong to Sri Anantha Padmanabha Swamy Temple, Attapur Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. It was their ancestral property, got under the provisions of A.P (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands, Act, 1950. The respondents No.1 and 2 and their forefathers were enjoying the property since decades, initially being protected tenants and later being absolute owners of the schedule land. At no point of time either the temple administration or Endowment authorities had any dealing, administration interference with regard to schedule property. There was no material whatsoever to treat the property as governed under the provisions of the Act, 1987 and to treat respondents 1 and 2 either as lessees or encroachers. The Endowment Act had no application and the authorities had no jurisdiction to entertain the proceedings. The present O.A. was not maintainable and the same was liable to be dismissed.

4.2. The respondent Nos.1 and 2 further contended that originally the property belonged to one Raghava Chary, who was the pattedar to an extent of Ac.1.27 gts., in Sy.No.435 and Yenugula Pentaiah @ Penta Reddy, father of respondent No.1 and grandfather of respondent No.2 being protected tenant. Likewise one Sulsusarapu Basu was the pattedar to an extent of Acs.2.28 gts in Sy.No.446 and Yenugula Pentaiah @ Penta Reddy, father of respondent No.1 and grandfather of respondent No.2 was tenant since many decades. The name of Sri Yenugula Pentaiah @ Penta Reddy was registered in the Protected Tenancy Register, which conferred absolute rights on him by virtue of operation of provisions of A.P (T.A) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands, Act, 1950, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law. The original pattedars sold their other agricultural lands and other properties for which, the said Yenugula Pentaiah @ Penta Reddy was rendering services as tenant, left the village without making any claim leaving the subject lands to Sri Yenugula Pentaiah @ Penta Reddy and thus they became absolute owners and enjoying the property since decades without any interruption till date, generations together.

4.3. Sri Yenugula Pentaiah @ Penta Reddy died about 15 years ago and after the death of said Yenugula Pentaiah @ Penta Reddy, the respondents became the absolute owners of the schedule land and were cultivating the same withou