Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Penumudi Venkata Subba Rao, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 22 November, 2019
Author: Kongara Vijaya Lakshmi
Bench: Kongara Vijaya Lakshmi
THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI
Writ Petition No.14304 of 2019
Order:
This Writ Petition is filed to declare the proceedings dated
22.06.2018 and 11.07.2018 issued by the third respondent and
consequential notice dated 19.07.2019 issued by the fourth respondent as
illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the order dated 23.04.2018 passed in
W.A.Nos.619 and 643 of 2018.
The case of the petitioners is that they are the hereditary Archakas
of Sri Rameswara Swamy Temple, Ganganamma pet, Tenali Town, Guntur
district and they have right to perform the archakatvam in accordance
with the registered settlement deed dated 04.05.1951 executed between
the hereditary trustees and hereditary archakas; as per the said
settlement deed, the hereditary archakas have to perform daily rituals and
if they are not in a position to perform daily rituals, they should entrust
the work to a person who is well versed with the daily rituals; the seventh
respondent, who is a deputy of the petitioners herein and who is nothing
to do with the hereditary archakatvam, filed Writ Petition No.23719 of
2013 questioning the action of the fifth respondent Temple in not taking
steps to hand over the turn of archakatvam in terms of the agreement
entered between the seventh respondent and the petitioners herein; the
case of the seventh respondent herein in the said Writ Petition is that his
father succeeded the archakatvam rights from one late Chavali
Hanumantha Rao and that the seventh respondent is prevented from
performing his hereditary rights; the first petitioner herein filed counter in
the said Writ Petition stating that the seventh respondent is not a
hereditary archaka and that his forefathers have not done any
archakatvam in the fifth respondent temple and suppressing those facts,
2
the seventh respondent obtained interim orders in the said Writ petition
and the Will dated 24.03.1954 relied upon by the seventh respondent is a
forged one; pursuant to the said interim order, the seventh respondent
broke open the locks of the fifth respondent temple and prevented the
fourth petitioner from performing his duties; the said Writ Petition
No.23719 of 2013 was disposed of along with W.P.Nos.29704 and 23243
of 2015, by a common order dated 22.03.2017, which is as follows.
"17. As seen from the material on record, the issue
involves number of disputed questions of facts. The
petitioner claims his right basing on a Will executed by
Seshaiah. The case of the 4th respondent is that the
petitioner is not hereditary archaka and he is only a deputy
and that the will executed by said Seshaiah is a forged one.
The material on record also refers to existence of two wills.
The Government Pleader for Endowments submits that the
petitioner and 4th respondent are creating nuisance in the
temple and causing inconvenience to the devotees during
festival/ auspicious days.
18. Since the issue involves disputed questions of fact,
more particularly with regard to execution of the will and
also as to whether they are forged or genuine, this Court
cannot decide the same under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India. The said issues can be decided based on oral and
documentary evidence to be adduced. As the statute
provides for a remedy of adjudication before the
Endowments Tribunal, this Court is of the view that the
aggrieved person has to approach the said Tribunal, raising
all factual and legal issues.
19. Having regard to the above, the writ petitions are
disposed of, directing the aggrieved person to approach the
Endowments Tribunal and seek redressal of their grievance
within a period of four (04) weeks from today, with an
interim application, in which event the Endowment Tribunal
shall decide the same within a period of four (04) weeks
thereafter. Till such time, the interim order granted by this
3
Court in W.P.M.P.No.29160 of 2013 in W.P.No.23719 of 2013
shall remain in force."
The seventh respondent again filed OA No.541 of 2017 on the file
of the A.P. Endowments Tribunal, Peda Kakani, seeking the very same
relief; the Tribunal passed interim orders in IA No.1045 of 2017 in OA
No.541 of 2017 dated 03.01.2018; aggrieved by the said orders, the
petitioners filed Writ Petition No.1244 of 2018 and the same was disposed
of on 12.03.2018; aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed
W.A.No.619 of 2018 and the respondents filed W.A.No.643 of 2018 which
are disposed of by order dated 23.04.2018 observing as follows.
"We consider it appropriate, therefore, to set aside the order
under appeal and direct that, pending disposal of the OA by
the Tribunal, the interim order passed by it on 03.01.2018
shall, to the extent it is in accordance with the interim order
passed by this Court earlier on 19.08.2013, continue to
remain in force. To put an end to this unseemly controversy
between members of a family, fighting over their rights to
offer prayers to the Lord, we direct the Endowments Tribunal
to dispose of the OA with utmost expedition and, in any
event, within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of
this order."
But, the Tribunal did not dispose of the OA till now; while so, the
sixth respondent has issued notice dated 19.07.2019 directing the
petitioners to handover the Archakatvam rights to the seventh
respondent; the said notice shows that the same was issued as per the
orders dated 23.04.2018 passed in W.A.Nos.619 and 643 of 2018; the
directions issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments which were
issued in the said notice are contrary to the orders passed by the Division
Bench of this Court and the interim order passed by the Endowments
Tribunal on 03.01.2018; when the petitioners refused to hand over the
4
charge, the sixth respondent initiated criminal proceedings against them;
as the impugned proceedings are contrary to the orders of the Division
Bench, the present Writ Petition is filed.
This Court, on 15.10.2019, while ordering notice before admission,
granted interim suspension of the impugned order.
The seventh respondent filed counter affidavit along with vacate
stay petition in IA No.3 of 2019 stating, inter alia, that the sanctity of the
Will dated 04.05.1991 and other connected issues are ceased by the
Endowments Tribunal; the entire issue relating to Archakatvam was the
subject matter of four Writ Petitions i.e., W.P.Nos.23719 of 2019, 21894
of 2013, 29704 and 23243 of 2015 which were disposed of by a common
order of this Court dated 22.03.2017 directing that the arrangement that
is in force shall be continued till the Endowments Tribunal would decide
the rights of the individuals; the seventh respondent filed OA No.541 of
2017 and an interim order was passed on 03.01.2018 in IA No.1045 of
2017 and the same was upheld by a Division Bench of this Court in WA
Nos.619 and 643 of 2018, dated 23.04.2018 and in the said order it was
indicated that the archakatvam that is being conducted by the respective
families as per the arrangement made by the temple authorities which
included both the petitioners and the seventh respondent would continue
even during the pendency of W.P.No.23719 of 2013 and batch; the
petitioners suppressed the fact of interim order dated 03.01.2018 passed
by the Tribunal in IA No.1045 of 2017 in OA No.541 of 2017 was assailed
before this Court and the same was directed to be continued; the present
notice is issued as per the family arrangement and that the present Writ
Petition is filed to defeat the orders of this Court in W.A.Nos.619 and 643
of 2018, dated 23.04.2018.
5
The fifth respondent filed counter affidavit along with vacate stay
petition in IA No.4 of 2019 stating that he is under legal obligation to
ensure that the seventh respondent shall be allowed to perform his
archakatvam in obedience to the orders of the Division bench and in strict
compliance of the order of the Division Bench the third respondent has
directed the fifth respondent to set in motion the process of handing over
services of achakatvam to the seventh respondent and sought for eviction
of the interim order dated 15.10.2019 passed in this Writ Petition and for
dismissal of the same.
As seen from the record, the seventh respondent herein filed
W.P.No.23719 of 2013 to declare the action of the Manager of the temple
in not taking steps to handover the turn of Archakatvam to the seventh
respondent herein in terms of the agreement. WPMP No.29160 of 2013
was filed in the said Writ Petition to direct the Manager of Sri Ramswa
Swamy Temple, Ganganammapet, Tenali town and Mandal, Guntur district
to take appropriate action to restore the archakatvam service to the
seventh respondent herein for which he is entitled to from 07.08.2013
pending disposal of the Writ Petition. The said WPMP was ordered as
prayed for on 19.08.2013. WP No.21894 of 2013 was filed by the
petitioners herein to declare the action of the seventh respondent herein
in declaring himself as hereditary archaka without any document as
arbitrary and illegal and a consequential direction was sought to direct the
seventh respondent herein not to interfere with the archakatvam in the
subject temple. W.P.No.29704 of 2015 was filed by the petitioners herein
questioning the action of the respondents 3 and 4 therein in permitting
the third party Purohits, who are respondents 8 to 21 therein, into the
temple to render archakatvam as illegal. W.P.No.23243 of 2015 was filed
6
by the petitioners herein challenging the proceedings dated 23.08.2014
passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments.
All the said Writ Petitions were disposed of by a common order
dated 22.03.2017 directing the aggrieved person to approach the
Endowments Tribunal for redressal of their grievance within a period of
four weeks from that day, with an interim application, and in which event,
the Endowments Tribunal was directed to decide the same within a period
of four weeks thereafter and it was further observed that till such time the
interim order granted by this court in WPMP No.29160 of 2013 in WP
No.23719 of 2013 shall remain in force.
Pursuant to the said order, the seventh respondent herein filed OA
No.541 of 2017 before the Endowments Tribunal at Amaravati. In the
said OA, IA No.1045 of 2017 was filed seeking a direction against the
official respondents herein to take necessary action against the petitioners
herein to handover archakatvam service to the seventh respondent herein
in the subject temple to enable him to perform his turn of archakatvam
service for a period of six (6) months from Sravana Masam to Magha
masam except Pushya masam which commenced on 24.07.2017 with
continuity of interim directions in every year pending disposal of the OA.
The said IA was disposed of on 03.01.2018 directing the official
respondents herein to allow the seventh respondent herein to perform
archakatvam service in the subject temple and directing the petitioners
herein not to obstruct the archakatvam service of the seventh respondent
herein as per his turn for six months from Srvavana Masam to Magha
masam except Pushya Masam as per custom and usage in every year until
disposal of the main OA. Challenging the said order in IA No.1045 of
2017 in OA No.541 of 2017, dated 03.01.2018, the petitioners herein filed
W.P.No.1244 of 2018. The said Writ Petition was disposed of on
7
12.03.2018 observing that the adjudication cannot be undertaken by the
Court again as an order has already been passed in W.P.No.23719 of
2013 and batch on 22.03.2017. Challenging the said order of the learned
single Judge in WP No.1244 of 2018, the seventh respondent filed WA
No.619 of 2018 and the petitioners herein fled WA No.643 of 2018. Both
the said Writ Appeals were disposed of by a common order dated
23.04.2018 setting aside the order under appeal dated 12.03.2018 and
observed that pending disposal of the OA by the Tribunal, the interim
order passed by the Tribunal on 03.01.2018, to the extent it is in
accordance with the interim order passed by this Court earlier on
19.08.2013, shall continue to remain in force and the Endowments
Tribunal was directed to dispose of the OA with utmost expedition and in
any event within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the
order, but the OA is still pending before the Endowments Tribunal. The
petitioners filed the present Writ Petition challenging the notice issued by
the Executive Officer dated 19.07.2019 directing the petitioners to hand
over archakatvam service to the seventh respondent herein on 01.08.2019
basing on the letter of the Deputy Commissioner of the Endowments
dated 22.06.2018 and 11.07.2018 to implement the orders of this Court in
W.A.Nos.619 and 643 of 2018. The said notice also refers to the letter
written by the seventh respondent dated 24.06.2018 requesting to
handover archakatvam service as per the directions of this Court. To the
said notice, the petitioners gave a reply stating that for every Kartheeka
Masam, the seventh respondent is performing archakatvam service and
for the year 2019-20 in Kartheeka Masam the petitioners ancestors i.e.,
"Penumudi archakas" have to perform archakatvam in the main temple.
The interim order passed by the Tribunal to the extent it is in accordance
with the interim order passed by this Court on 19.08.2013 was directed to
be continued till the disposal of the OA in W.A.Nos.619 and 643 of 2018.
8
The interim order passed on 19.08.2013 in WP MP No.29160 of 2013 in
WP No.23719 of 2013 is to direct the Manager of the temple to take
appropriate action to restore archakatvam service to the seventh
respondent herein in the subject temple for which he is entitled to from
07.08.2013. The order passed in IA No.1045 of 2017 in OA No.541 of
2017 is as follows.
"Perused the material on record and heard the
arguments of the counsel for petitioner and respondent and
after taking all the factors into consideration, I hold the
point, that the petitioner is doing archakatvam service on the
petitioner temple continuously, even b the date of raising
dispute b the respondents 5 to 8 and hence, the balance of
convenience is in faovur of petitioner and even there is a
prima facie case in favour of petitioner basing on the
documents filed by the petitioner, irreparable loss would
occur, if the same is not allowed to the petitioner. Hence, it
is ordered to allow the petition directing the respondents 1 to
4 to allow the petitioner to perform archakatvam service in
the subject temple and directing the respondents 5 to 8 not
to obstruct the archakatvam service of petitioner as per his
turn for 6 months from Sravana Masam to Magha Masam,
except Pushya Masam as per custom and usage in every
year until disposal of the main OA."
The Division Bench of this Court observed that the interim order
passed on 03.01.2018 by the Tribunal in IA No.1045 of 2017 in OA No.541
of 2017 to the extent it is in accordance with the interim order passed on
19.08.2013 in WPMP No.21960 of 2013 in WP No.23719 of 2013 should
continue to remain in force till the disposal of the OA. In view of the
same, the impugned notice dated 19.07.2019 issued by the Executive
Officer is in conformity with the orders dated 23.04.2018 in W.A.Nos.619
and 643 of 2018.
9
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I see no
reasons to interfere with the impugned order. The Writ Petition is devoid
of merit and the same is liable to be dismissed. However, the
Endowments Tribunal is directed to dispose of OA No.514 of 2017 as
expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two (2) months.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. However, the
Endowments Tribunal is directed to dispose of OA No.514 of 2017 as
expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (3) months
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order
as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in
this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
_____________________________
KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI, J.
Date: 22nd November 2019 Nsr 10 THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI Writ Petition No.14304 of 2019 Date: 22nd November 2019 Nsr