HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No. 23136 OF 2009

O R D E R:

Assailing the proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 14-10-2009 which directed the 4^th respondent – Executive Officer to take/assume complete charge of Petitioner Mutt, this Writ Petition is filed, on the ground of violation of the provisions of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for brevity, 'the Act').

2. During the hearing, petitioner has taken out I.A.No. 1 of 2025 to receive the additional affidavit along with material papers annexed thereto treating the same as part and parcel of the Writ Petition.

3. Petitioner Mutt is one of the oldest Hindu Religious Mutts in Hyderabad and owns Acs.540.30 guntas of land in Survey Nos.1010/1 to 1015, 1024, 1026, 1027, 1028, 1029, 1030, 1036, 1037, 1038, 1039, 1040, 1041, 1042, 1066, 1067 to 1070 of Kukatpally Village. By registered lease deeds, dated 23-07-1964, 14-09-1996, 21-03-1969 and 20-04-1978, said lands were leased out to M/s Indian Detonators Limited and IDL Chemicals Limited for a period of 99 years and since then, the said companies are in possession of the land.

3.1. It is stated, deponent was recognized as Mahanth of Mutt by the 2nd respondent by proceedings dated 25-11-2006. In the process of complying with Section 22-A of the Act, it came to light that aforesaid land is not in possession of lessees and M/s Gulf Oil Corporation Limited is in possession thereof. Further, lessees have not protected leased property and land admeasuring Acs.9.00 was converted into burial grounds, when it was left unfenced by the lessees. As the said leases are in violation of the provisions of the Act whereunder all the existing leases stood determined by operation of law, the Mutt initiated proceedings for eviction before the Endowments Tribunal i.e. O.A.No. 579 of 2010 (old O.A.No. 21 of 2008) under Section 83 of the Act for eviction of lessee and for payment of user and occupation charges. The Tribunal by order dated 17.09.2011 directed petitioner to approach the civil Court for ascertaining use and occupation charges. Questioning the order of eviction, lessee filed Writ Petition No. 31893 of 2011 while petitioner Mutt filed Writ Petition No. 8005 of 2012 for ascertainment of use and occupation charges. By common order dated 07.03.2013, Writ Petition No. 31893 of 2011 was dismissed and Writ Petition No. 8005 of 2012 was allowed. Lessee filed Civil Appeals No. 7759-7760 of 2014 which were dismissed by the Supreme Court by judgment dated 13.09.2022. Pursuant to the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Assistant Commissioner of Endowments delivered possession of schedule lands to petitioner Mutt on 15.10.2022. Subsequently, petitioner Mutt pursued I.A.No. 2 of 2010 in O.A.No. 579 of 2010 for payment of use and occupation charges and enquiry into the said charges is going on before the Tribunal.

3.2. The case of petitioner is that they have been taking all measures for proper upkeep and maintenance of properties of Mutt. However, the 2^nd respondent issued impugned proceedings directing the Executive Officer to take/assume complete charge of temples/institutions and report compliance without fail. But, till now, the 4^th respondent had not assumed charge.

4. Learned Senior Counsel Sri M.V. Suresh Kumar appearing on behalf of Sri M.V. Pratap Kumar, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the 2^nd respondent had no power or authority to either appoint an Executive Officer or empowering him/her to take charge of a Mutt as there is no enabling provision in the Act for such an action. It is submitted that Matathipathi is the supreme authority to exercise control over the affairs of Mutts subject to the provisions of the Act. Consequent upon the amendment of Act by Act 33 of 2007, the power in respect of a Mutt, be it removal of Matathipathi, filling of temporary/permanent vacancies in the office of Matadhipathi, recognition of nominations as Matathipathi and the power to fra