Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Muppalla Bala Krishna vs Sri Kodandarama Swamy Temple Trust on 10 March, 2025
APHC010120372025 Bench Sr.No:-4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
[3483]
AT AMARAVATI
WRIT APPEAL NO: 206 of 2025
Muppalla Bala Krishna ...Appellant
Vs.
Sri Kodandarama Swamy Temple Trust and others ...Respondents
**********
Advocate for Appellant : Sri Srinivasa Rao Narra Advocates for Respondents : Sri Kasa Jagan Mohan Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Home, learned Government Pleader for Endowments, Sri Miapuram Srinivas Rao, learned Government Pleader for Revenue.
CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI DATE : 10th March 2025 Per DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ (Oral):
The present Writ Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 25.02.2025 in W.P.No.86 of 2025.
2. Briefly stated, the material facts are as under:-
W.P.No.86 of 2025 came to be filed by Sri Kodandarama Swamy Temple Trust and others alleging inaction on the part of respondent Nos.2 to 6 in not taking steps for evicting respondent No.7. It is alleged that respondent No.7 had encroached upon the temple property situate in Sy.Nos.249/2B and 249/2A in Nemalipuri Village, Rajupalem Mandal, Palnadu District whereby 2 the said respondent, it is stated, had encroached upon approximately Ac.10-00 cents of land.
3. The petition was filed in ignorance of the amended provisions of Section 83 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short, "the Endowments Act 30/1987), which authorized the eviction of an encroacher from the land belonging to the Charitable or Religious Institutions or Endowments at the behest of Executive Officer of the Charitable or Religious Institutions or Endowments or the Assistant Commissioner or any authority higher in rank thereof.
4. According to the amended provisions of Section 83 of the Endowments Act 30/1987, a notice can be sent by any of the officers mentioned herein above requiring the encroacher to remove encroachment. The alleged encroacher is, however, permitted to submit his reply and explanation to such a notice within the time stipulated therein. Failure on the part of the encroacher to remove the encroachment within the stipulated time, upon orders in that regard, authorize the removal of the encroachment and the encroacher from the premises for which even police assistance is envisaged.
5. The amendment of Section 83 of the Endowments Act 30/1987, as amended by Act 36/2023, came into effect on 26.06.2023. Against an order passed by the Executive Officer or the Assistant Commissioner, as the case may be, an appeal is envisaged in terms of Section 83(6) before the Endowments Tribunal.
3
6. This provision is different from the procedure, which had earlier been prescribed in terms of Section 87 of the Endowments Act 30/1987, which envisaged the temple authorities, through its Executive Officer, to approach the Endowments Tribunal for initiating action for retrieval of the land after getting a declaration that the land was an Endowment Land or belonging to the temple. It is in the aforementioned backdrop that although the petition was filed seeking a direction from the Court to the official respondent Nos.2 to 6 to take action against private respondent No.7, yet, it appears that on coming to know about the amendment incorporated under Section 83 of the Endowments Act 30/1987, the Court passed the following directions:-
"i. If the petitioners intend to evict the 7th respondent, they are directed to initiate steps for evicting the 7th respondent under Section 83(2) of the Endowments Act and thereafter submit a report before the 5th respondent temple.
ii. Further, the respondent Nos.4 and 6 are directed to cooperate with the petitioners as and when required for eviction of the 7th respondent."
7. On a perusal of the judgment and order impugned and in particular, the directions so issued, it is clear that instead of giving liberty to the petitioners, who are respondent Nos.1 to 4 herein, to initiate action in terms of the amended provisions of Section 83 of the Endowments Act 30/1987, a direction was issued to take resort to the said section and the procedure prescribed therein and further, to submit a report before the Manager of Sri Kodandaramaswamy and Anjaneyaswamy Temple, who was respondent No.5 4 in the writ petition. A direction was also issued for the official respondent Nos.4 and 6 to cooperate with the Temple Trust for eviction of respondent No.7.
8. On a perusal of the said order, it would thus appear that the directions leave no scope for consideration of any explanation, which could be tendered by the appellant herein, against the proposed eviction, which would be initiated against the appellant herein. The directions to take steps for evicting the appellant and further direction to respondent Nos.4 and 6 to cooperate with the petitioners, who are respondent Nos.1 to 4 in the present Writ Appeal, would leave little scope for the appellant herein to escape the rigors of eviction if at all he had a case to submit before the authority which would have issued the notice to the appellant.
9. We, accordingly, modify the judgment and order impugned in the following manner:
i) The writ petitioners/respondent Nos.1 to 4 herein would be at liberty to take resort to the procedure for eviction, as prescribed under Section 83 of the amended provisions of the Endowments Act 30/1987, as amended by Act 36/2023. The appellant herein would be at liberty to respond to the show cause notice, if at all issued by the authorities mentioned in the amended provision of Section 83 of the Endowments Act 30/1987, as amended by Act 36/2023, which would then consider on its own merits and a speaking order passed. In case the appellant still feels aggrieved of the order which may be 5 passed, he would be entitled to avail the remedy before the Tribunal as is otherwise envisaged.
10. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is disposed of. No costs.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ RAVI CHEEMALAPATI, J AMD 6 44 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT APPEAL NO: 206 of 2025 Dt: 10.03.2025 AMD