THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.1162 OF 2011

JUDGMENT:

This civil miscellaneous appeal is filed aggrieved by the order dated 05.06.2010 in O.A.No.16 of 2010 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Warangal Zone. 2. Heard Mr. M. Vidya Sagar, learned counsel for the appellant, and Mr. H. Rajesh Kumar, learned Government Pleader for Arbitration appearing for the respondents.

3. The appellant herein is respondent and respondents are applicants before the Commissioner. O.A.No.16 of 2010 came to be filed by applicants on the ground that applicant No.2 i.e., Sri Mallikarjuna Swamy Devastanam, Inavole Village, Wardhannapet Mandal, Warangal, is the owner and possessor of landed property to an extent of Acs.4.17 guntas in Survey No.935/A situated at Inavole Village, Wardhannapet Mandal, Warangal District. The said land is entered in Column No.7 of the Approved Property Register prepared under Section 43 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act 30 of 1987 (Act No.30 of 1987). Pattadar passbook is also issued in favour of the Temple.

4. It is alleged that appellant/respondent (Koyyada Mallaiah) occupied land to an extent of 38 sq. yards and constructed back portion of house in the said 38 sq. yards of land. Notices were issued on 25.06.2009 and 04.02.2010. The appellant/respondent before the Deputy Commissioner failed to vacate the premises, as such, he is said to be in unauthorized occupation of the land to an extent of 38 sq. yards belonging to the Temple. Learned Deputy Commissioner, after hearing the arguments of the respondents/applicants and considering the documents i.e., Register maintained under Section 43 of the Act, pattadar passbooks, copies of notices, opined that appellant/respondent was in unauthorized occupation and directed him to remove the encroachment and deliver possession belonging to the Temple within 15 days from the date of receipt of the order, dated 05.06.2010. It is this order which is under challenge in this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

5. Learned counsel for appellant/respondent submitted that Temple is not the owner of the property and invited the attention of this Court to the document at page No.21 and contended that by virtue of gift settlement deed dated 13.12.2007, the appellant/respondent is the owner of the property. It is further submitted that no notice was served before order dated 05.06.2010 was passed. It is also submitted that substitute service was in a local paper called “Praja Theerpu”, which is not a widely circulated newspaper.

6. It is submitted that when substitute service is directed, it is imperative that substitute service is published in a widely circulated newspaper in vernacular language. It is further averred that Praja Teerpu is not a widely circulated newspaper and that the appellant/ respondent, being resident of Inavole Village, Wardhannapet Mandal, Warangal District, did not have access to the newspaper. Hence, it is deemed that service is not affected. It is pointed out that the order of the Deputy Commissioner is an ex parte order and in violation of principles of natural justice (without there being notice) holding the appellant as encroacher/ unauthorized occupier of the land to an extent of 38 sq. yards in Survey No.935/A is not proper.

7. Learned counsel submitted that the order of the Deputy Commissioner is not a valid order and is liable to be set aside for want of adherence to principles of natural justice.

8. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for Endowments Department appearing for respondents contended that notices were served on appellant on 25.06.2009 and 04.02.2010. That the appellant failed to respond to the said notices, did not vacate the Temple land encroached even after several demands. It is further submitted that the extent of land under occupation by appellant is for the Temple for Jathara. Continuous unauthorized occupation is not backed by any lease, ap