High Court · 2025

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTTCE E.V. VENUGOPAL ON NO: WRITPETITI 945 oF2018 Between: AND

1. 2

3. 4 i#"ft,,{"*,;liti.i*i"i?:trfi ,}*ir;,.,,#l*:#fl ,,:,{.Jiffi i ...PETITIONER o*. bv its prr. secretary, Endowments Dept, r.S. #.u1ffi[Fflffif, tiirg[iffi::ilififii;oj'oo*'unt' Department, reransana State At 5l;ifr ,r#!i:ilslYiln:i"inilil%:,-ffi ;i:iBi:lyfl n,ru,."ir,,i: s;,^rrl,"sJ,,,ffi H1vdf'6tf; lfri,*:fld j"d:lf R4 is impteaded as per C.O. dated 2116t2018 in lA 3/2018 #ll.!t?{,1; ...RESPONDENTS petrtion under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therew pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction ,,.." o"llr,lrii:;:J :;Trff::; WRIT OF MANDATUUS declaring the proceedings dated 11_12_2017 in proc. in D Dis No'A2/3 028t2017 passed by the respondent No.2 appointing and directing the Executive officer to take possession of a, structures and to assume charge in respect of respondent No 3 tempre and assuming the charge by the Executive officer on 20-12-2017 in pursuance of the orders 11-12-2017 is iregar and arbitrary' unjust and vioration of Sec. 2g of the Terangana charitabre and Hindu Religious lnstitutions and Endowments Act 3Olg7, and the Circular dated 7_9_ 2010 besides of principles of natural justice and consequenay set-asiile the same -ali the respondents to restore the administration of the respondent No'3 by directing temple to the Petitioner IANO:1O 2018 F Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition' the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents restore the administration of the-respondent No' 3 temple to the petitioner by suspending the orders dated 11-12-2017 in Procs' D.Dis.No.A2l3 oz,t2o17 passed by the respondent No. 2 forthwith, pending disposal of the above writ petition' Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI' SRINIVASA MURTHY CHEEDELLA counsel for the Respondent Nos' 1&2: sRl counser ror the Respondent No'3: sRl ''*i[J?X1"1,[!i"" KorHA' sc Counsel for the Respondent No'4: -- The Court made the following: ORDER HFit$t$#hMENrs 7,. TIIE IION'BLE SRT JI,STICE I.V. VENUGOPAL ORI)ER: T ON No. 945 OF. 20 18 This Writ petitior of rndia seeking ,n" .,,;::":J;l::_t""tion 226 of constitution r heedella, learned counsel for Iearned Government pleader respondent Nos. 1 ald 2

2. Heard Mr.Srinivasa Murthy C the petitioner arrd Mr.Mangilal Naik, for Endowments appearing for No representation on beha_lf of respondent Nos.3 arrd 4. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the members of the Bhaktha Samajam, to cater the needs of the temple ald devotees, have decided to register their Samqjam and accordingly, SRI MADH BHAGAVATH GEETHA BAKTHA SAMAJAM was registered with the Registrar of Societies, Ranga Reddy East on 8-3-2016 vide Regd.No.42o of 2016 and the petitioner herein was elected as the Secretary of the said regrstered Bhaktha Samqlam. He further submits that the E*e"*t{e ofhcer went to respondent No.3 temple L 2 2o-12-2orz with police aid without issuing a,y notice to the petitioner ald forcibly sealed the Hundies' store room' kitchen and other belongings of respondent No ' 3 temple ' He further submits that the annual income of the temPle for the Year 2Ol6-L7 was Rs'88'500/- and the balalce was Rs'63'288/- and the income of the tempre for every year was ress than Rs.2 lakhs' He further submits that as per Section 29 of the Act'30/87 there shall be an Executive Officer for every Charitable or Religious Institution or End'owment to be appointed by the Government in the case of institutions and Endowments having income of rupees one crore and above' in the case of other Tnstitutions and Endowments included in the lists gublished under clauses @) and (b) oJ Section 6' in respect of charitable or religious less than itustitutions or Endoument hauing income of in the list rupees tuto lqkhs per oinnum' and included published under clause (c) of Section 6 it shall not be leecessrrry to appoint an Executioe Officer' Therefore' he seeks indr.r.lgence of this Court' 4. Learned Government Pleader for Endowments submits that two parties are claiming management of the said institution' One of the parties Mr.Kandakatla Padma Reddy has got a trust 3 in the name and style of ,,Bhagavath Geetha Bhakta Samajam Trust" registered ald a Trust Deed was executed vide Document No.3/2O14, dated 27-OI-2O14. The other party Mr.M.Venkat Reddy, who is the petitioner herein has got registered under Society Act as ,'Sri Madh Bhagavath Geetha Bhaktha Samajam,, vide Document No.42o/20r5, dated 0g-03-2o1s. Further, one Sri Sanjeevaiah claiming himself as ,,Guruji,, or ,,Swamiji,, been residing in the Mandapam along with his so cailed folrowers or disciples. Since, rivalries cropped up between both the parties, maly complaints have been filed against each other, an enquiry has been ordered by the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, Ranga Reddy District under whose Jurisdiction the Institutions are situated. During enquiry, it has been revealed that the land where Sri Geetha Mardir and other Temples are located belongs to Sri Balaji Venkateshwara Swamy Temple, Venkatapuram [V), Ghatkeshar (M), Medchal District and in order to resolve the crisis and to strengthen the administration of the Institutions, the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Reddy District has issued orders in Rc.No.C/383 1/2016, dated 26_11_2016 directing the Executive Officer, Sri Balaji Venkateshwara Swamy Temple, Venkatapuram to assume the charge of the 3.d respondent Institution. Department, Rarrga 4 Accordingly, the Executive Officer of Sri Balaji Venkateshwara Swamy Temple, Venkatapuram assumed the charge of the 3.d respondent Institution on 30-1:l-2016.In the meanwhile, the petitioner herein, who is the Secretary of Sri Madh Bhagavath Geetha Bhakta Samajam, Balajinagar, Ghatkesar aggrieved by the said orders, has instituted a W.P.No.3279 l2o|7 on the file of this Court; while allowing the Writ Petition, this Court vide order dated 26_1 |-2016 has set-aside the proceedings, however, granted liberty to the competent Authorities to take action in accordance with law. He further submits that the 2'd respondent has issued impugned orders in the interest of better administration and the Executive Ofllcer was directed to take possession of all structure including Sri Geetha Mandiram raised in the lands belonging to Sri Balaji Venkateshwara Swamy Temple, Venkatapuram. Accordingly, the Executive Officer took possession of Sri Geetha Mandiram and all the sub-temples on 2o.12.2o|T.Hefurthersubmitsthatnoticetothepetitioneris not mandatory to appoint Executive Ofhcer for better administration of the institutions and to carry out the instructions of trustees and safe guarding the temple properties' Therefore, he submits that the present Writ Petition 1S misconceived and seeks to dismiss this Writ Petition' a 5

5. Having regard to the submissions of both the learned counsel arrd upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court opines that the impugned order has been passed on administrative grounds for ensuring better administration of

3.d respondent institution, as such this Court-finds no perversity in the order passed by the concerned authorities. Hence, this Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed.

6. Accordingly, this Writ petition is dismissed. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stald closed //TRUE COPY/7 SD/. K.AMMAJI DEPUTY#IGISTRAR SECTIbN OFFICER ?*:33Ji"'EiPS'|'J$S.6]UHE[|J:'iih'85]ktnfl i";Bt8la 3'-llixaxis iSHx- REDDY KorHA' scioPucl Two CD CoPies $e\ee8"',"r B IVl TKS e,{q. To,

1. 2 3 4 I I I I :: : I I j t i I HIGH COURT I I l DATED:0210412025 r.\ T rlE S r.q r.1. \. )a (,) ) 10 sEP 2025 \ \.... ORDER WP.No.945 of 2018 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS PAA E\+w ; i I I