1. Raikanapeta Mallesham v. The State of Telangana

Sri Raja Rajeshwara Swamy Devasthanam Rep by its, Executive Officer, Vemulawada, Karimnagar District. The Vemulawada Nagar Panchayat Rep by its, Commissioner Vemulawada, Karimnagar District. The Tahsildar, Vemulawada Mandal, Karimnagar District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in trying to construct the wall in the petitioners land by issuing the tender notification item 8 in Tender Notice No. 312015-16 in R.C.No. Cl5O4l2O15 dated 15.05.2015 published in Andhra Bhoomi Daily News Paper District Edition dated 16.05.2015 by attempting 'I i i to encroach petitioners land in survey No. 1866 situated near Bheemeshwaralayam, Vemulawada, Karimnagar district is arbitrary, illegal, against the principles of Natural Justice and violation of the rights guaranteed under the Constitution of lndia and misuse of the Provis ons under the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious lnstitutions and lindowments Act, 19g7 and without any power, right or authority and set aside the impugned tender notification in Tender Notice No. 312015-16 in R.C. No CtSO4l2OlS dated 15.05.2015 published in Andhra Bhoomi Daily news paper District Edition dated '16.05.2015 only in respect of ltem 8 in the notification including all further proceedings and consequently direct the respondents not to construct the wall in the land belongs to the petitioners to an extent of Ac. 0.1 g guntas in survey No. 1866 situated near Bheemeshwaralayam, Vemulawada, i(arimnagar district and to pass such other order or orders appropriate in the case. l.A. NO: 2 OF 201S(WPMP. NO: 209 38 0F 201s) Petition under Section 151 cPC praying that in the oircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Co urt may be pleased to suspend the impugned tender notification in Tender N,rtice No. 3/2015.16 in R.c.No. c15o412015 dated 15.05.2015 published in Andl-rra Bhoomi Daily news paper District Edition dated '16.05.2015 only in respect of lrem g in the notification including all further proceedings pending disposal of -re writ petition in the interest of justice and pass such order and orders appropriate in the case. l.A. NO: 3 OF 201 s(WPMP. NO: 20939 OF 2015) 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 issue direction to the respondents No. 3 not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners' land to an extent of Ac. 0.18 guntas in survey No. 1g66 situated near Bheemeshwaralayam, Vemulawada, Karimnagar district frending disposal of the writ Petition in the interest of justice and pass such order and orders appropriate in the case. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2015 OWM P. NO: 3102 OF 2015) Between: Sri Raja Rajeshwara Swamy Devasthanam Rep by its, Executive Officer, Vemulawada, Karimnagar District. ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENT NO.3 AND

1. Raikanapeta Mallesham, S/o. Narasaiah, {ged about. 58 years, O- -cc Agricultrire, Rl/o. H.No. 9-2-3311, Chakkapalli Road, Vemulawada Town 136 Mandal, Karimnagar District.

2. Raikanapeta Naresh, S/o. Mallesham, Aged about 3? y99q, Oc'c..Private Employee, Rl/o. H.No. 2:l-52815, Street No. 9, Near Bank of lndia, Nallakunta, Hyderabad.

3. Raikanapeta Lava Kumar, S/o. Mallesham' years, Occ Businesi, Ft/o. H.No. 9-2-3311 , Chakkapalli Road, Vemulawada Town 86 Mandal, Karimnagar District. about 30 -Aged . ... RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS

4. The State of Telangana rep by its, Principal Secretary, Endowments Department, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad.

5. The Commissioner of Endowments Tilak Roads' Abids, Hyderabad. 6. The Vemulawada Nagar Panchayat Rep by its, Commissioner Vemulawada, Karimnagar District.

7. The Tahsildar, Vemulawada Mandal, Karimnagar District. ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 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 vacate the interim order passed in W.P.M.P.No.20938 of 2015 in W.P.No.16101 of 2015' Dt.15.06.2015 and dismiss the writ petition with costs. Counsel for Petitioner : SRI ASHOK GOUD, rep., SRI PONNAM MAHESH BABU Counsel for the Respondents: Ms.B.N.SHAILAJA, AGP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following: ORDER tn'' HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGF^SH BHEEMAP'AKA WRIT PETITI ONS No. 16L01 ()F 2015 o RDER: Petitioners assail the action of the 3'd respondent rn trying to construct wall in their land bY issuing tender noti{lcationitcmsinTenderNoticeNo.3l2o|51{;inR.C.No- Cl5O4l2015, dated 15 05'2015 published in AnChra Bhoomi daity newspaper District Edition dateci l6 ()5 20 15 by attempting [o encroach their land in Survey No 1866 ncar Bht:emeshwaralayam, Vemulawada, Karimnagar D ist rict'

2. Ms. B.N. Shailaja, learned Assistant Government PleaderforEndowmentshasplacedbelorethis(]ourtcopytlf judgmcnt in Writ Appeal No 1425 of 2024 preferrt:d :rgainst the order dated 3O.1O.2O24 in Writ Petition No 3042:' oI 2024 The said Writ Petition was frled questioning the ttr[crference of officialrespondentsthereinwiththesubjectpr.'pcrtywithout issuing notice and without following due process The learned Single Judge disposed of the said Writ Pe tition 'rn the ground that petitioner raised several disputed questions of fact and the SamecannotbeadjudicatedinWritPetitionandgrantedliberty to them to avail remedy of approaching th€r Endo"r'ments Tribunal. In the Appeal, the Division Bench alllrmcd the said frnding of the learned Single Judge lt also obs:rved that it is \ \ , I 2 \ settled legal principle that disputed questions of fact cannot be decided in a summar5r proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as per the judgments of the Hon,ble Apex Court in Shublrrrs Jain u- Rajeshuari Shiua;nt and Radha Krishaa Industries o. S,tdte oJ Himachal pradesh2.

3. In view of the said judgment, Sri ponnam Ashok Goud, learned counsel appearing for Sri ponnam Mahesh Babu. learned counsel for petitioners submits that this Writ petition may also be disposed of in terms thercof.

4. Recording the submission madc, thc Writ petition is disposed of leaving liberty to pctitioners to approach the Endowments Tribunal for adjudication of their right and entitlement over the subject property. No cosls.

5. Consequently, thc miscellaneous Applications, if any shall stand closed. \ &0fl scr-onliw-5c'-68> scL-+7t [zr,)6 To, //TRUE COPY// SD/- A. SRINIVASA REDDY SSISTANT REGIS SECTION OFFICER

1. The Principal Secretary, Endowments Department, Telangana Secretariat, State of Telangana Hyderabad.

2. The Commissioner of Endowments Tilak Roads, Abids, Hyderabad' 3. The Executive Officer, Sri Raia Raieshwara Swamy Devasthanam Vemulawada, Karimnagar District.

4. The Commissioner Vemulawada, Vemulawada Nagar Panchayat Karimnagar District.

5. The Tahsildar, Vemulawada Mandal, Karimnagar District- 6. One CC to SRI PONNAM MAHESH BABU, Advocate. [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP FOR ENDOWMENTS, High Court for the State of Telangana

8. Two CD CoPies. ,J(- HIGH COURT DATED:0510312025 ORDER WP.No.16101 of 2015 /{, ,/.r \,tz ----/1=:--: 1i .''- srA /t 3 0 I'IAY 2025 a \ ) ,! t_ ,1) a -i3e.,,",.. '\_-- ,.tr-1) -:-' DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS