THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.34858 of 2025

ORDER:

Heard Sri M.Damodar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Bhukya Mangilal Naik, learned Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri Ch.Sathish Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.4-Temple. With their consent, this Writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission itself.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners filed the present Writ Petition seeking to declare the action of the respondents in issuing impugned auction notice issued by the respondent No.4 vide Lr.No.14/ST/T.Pally/2025 dated 30.10.2025 and conducting auction on 06.11.2025 of the lease hold rights of the temple lands in Sy.No.322 admeasuring Ac.11-02 guntas and in Sy.No.322/1 admeasuring Ac.12-03 guntas, situated at Tippaipally village, Pebbair Mandal, Wanaparthy District, in favour of the respondent No.5, though the lease hold rights of the petitioners in respect of the said temple land is being protected under Section 82 of the Telangana Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for brevity, “the Act, 1987”) and the said auction notice is contrary to Rule 11 of the Telangana Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Lease of Agriculture Lands Rules, 2003 issued vide G.O.Ms.No.379, Revenue (Endo.I) dated 11.03.2003 (for brevity, “the Rules, 2003”), as illegal and arbitrary.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners are the residents of Thippaipally and Gummadam Villages of Pebbair Mandal, Wanaparthy District and they are cultivating the agricultural land of the respondent No.4-Temple in Sy.No.322 admeasuring Ac.1-02 guntas and in Sy.No.323 admeasuring Ac.12-03 guntas as lessees. Though they are small farmers, their rights are being protected under Section 82 of the Act, 1987. As per the above provision of law, the rights of lessees of the respondent No.4-Temple, who are landless poor persons, are being protected either by continuing their tenancy rights permitting them to pay 2/3^rd of the market rent for similarly placed lands as lease amount or permit them to purchase the land of the temple as per prevailing market value by paying the sale consideration by way of four equal installments, if the respondent No.4-Temple wanted to alienate the above land.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners had submitted an application on 18.09.2020 to the respondent No.3-Assistant Commissioner, Endowments, Mahabubnagar District requesting to protect their rights as tenants of the temple land and instead of disposing of the same, the respondent authorities have issued impugned auction notice dated 09.05.2024 vide Lr.No.SMST/TPLY/2023. Aggrieved by the action of the respondent authorities, the petitioners filed W.P.No.13339 of 2024 and the same was dismissed as infructuous, in view of the submissions made by learned Government Pleader for Endowments.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that thereafter, the respondent authorities have issued the present impugned auction notice, without following Rule 11 of the Rules, 2003 issued vide G.O.Ms.No.379, Revenue (Endo.I) dated 11.03.2003 and the same is contrary to the orders of this Court in W.P.No.12306 of 2021 dated 06.05.2021. In view of the same, learned counsel requested this Court to allow the Writ Petition by setting aside the impugned notice dated 30.10.2025. 6. The Rule 11 of the Rules, 2003 (G.O.Ms.No.379, Revenue (Endo.I), dated 11.03.2003) reads as follows:

“11. Publication of Auction Notice: A copy of the auction notice shall be published in the language of the locality at least ten days prior to the date fixed for auction, by affixture.”

In the instant case, Public Auction Notice was issued on

30.10.2025 and Public Auction was conducted on 06.11.2025.

It clearly shows the violation of the above Rule.

7. On the other hand, learned Gover