High Court · 2025

1 . Sri Swayambhu Lakshmi Venkateswara Mandal, Jogulamba Gadwal District, T Executive Officer. The Assistant Commissioner of End The Commissioner of Endowme ts, Government of Telangana, yd r bad B oo a k U ta T o n U g E dowments) Department, Secretariat, T e Q tate o T h Hyderabad, Rep.by its Principal Secreta wamy Temple ,Maldakal Village and langana State, Represented by its nts, Mahaboobnagar District. k Road nsa a R n a e a d S b H 2 3 4 n f U ( ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Con circumstances stated in the affidavit filed pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, m Writ of I/ANDAMUS declaring the action Swayambhu Lakshmi Venkateswara Swa [/andal, Jogulamba Gadwal District, represe to dispossess and taking possession of the i.e., petitroner No.1 bearing Door No.1-24, titution of lndia praying that in the herewith, the High Court may be re particularly a writ in the nature of of the '1't respondent i.e., Sri y Temple, Maldakal Village and ted by its Executive Officer in trying houses belonging to the petitioners petitioner No.2 bearing Door No.1- t I I i I I 2411, petitioner No.3 bee Door No.1-25, situated rring Door No 1_24.1(part), and petitioner No.4 bearing D str ct, as bad,,,,"n",,,;l:;::lr:#i"11 T;T:1",:"J:::::. :::T; tout evicting the petitioners under Sec.g3 of the natural justice and witf Endowments Act lA NO: 1 oF 2021 Petition under Ser "d " .,pl:o;::[H:l:ili;,:::ffiJ,,i,:J::"j; the arrdavt r grant DIRECT the 1.t rr Swa m y rem p e,," r, ;:?T,:il'" l ;.t rlffi : :::H:.j :":ilT",;,.,1,il; represented by its Executive officer not to interfere with the peacefur possession and enjoyment of the h( bearns Door No,.24, ff::"':ff:T"::i:"#,il"i,;;, i]llllll, Xl l bearing Door No 1-241(oart), and,petitioner No.4 bearing Door No.1-25, situated at Mardakar Vi'age and r\,andar, Joguramba Gadwar District, pending disposar of the main Writ petition Counsel for the petitioner: SRl. M. VIDYASAGAR Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI C.H .SATISH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2to4: SRI MANGILALA NAIK, GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following: ORDER I THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTIC E.V.VENUCIOPAL U/RIT PETITION No.l 771OF 202L ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed unde Article 226 of Constitution of Irrdia seeking the following relief/s: "..-.to issue a writ, order or direction, more p Writ of MANDAMUS dectaring the actio Sri Swayambhu Lakshmi Venkateswara S Mandal, Jogulamba Gadwal District, repre trying to dispossess and taking possession petitioners i,e-, petitioner No.l bearing Door Door No.1-24/1, petitioncr No.3 bearing No.4 bearing Door No.l-25, situated at Jogulamba Gadwal District, as bad, illega violation of principles of natural justice an undcr Section 83 of Ore Endowrnents Act as this Court may deem fit and proper...-" 2, Heard Mr.M.Vidyasagar, le ticularly a writ in the nature of of the 1"1 respondent i.e., y Temple, Matdakal Village and nted by its Executive Officer in of the houses belonging to the No.l-24, petitioner No.2 bearing No.1 241 (part), and pctitioner Maldakal Village and Mandal , arbitrary, opposed to larv iri without evicting the peritioners pass such other order or orders ed counsel representing petitioners, Mr.Ch.Satish Kumar, earned Standing Counsel representing respondent No.l and Mr.Mangilal Naik, learned Government for Endowments repres ting respondent Nos.2 to 4.

3. Learned counsel representing etitioners submits that the petitioners herein are in peaceful ssession of the respective subject property for quite some time d they a-re legal owners of the said property and have been p the required taxes to the Gram Panchayat and obtained neces ar5z permission to construct houses in the subject property le y. He further draws the attention of this Court to the notice ed 27.10.2018 issued by the Executive Officer of responden No.l temple stating that 2 .- - ,l \ \t - within 7 days the subject construction has to be removed else appropria|e action will be taken as per law, which is nothing but abuse of process ol law. In support of his contention he relies upon the decision rendered by this Court in W.p.No.38913 of 2075 ald seeks to allow the Writ Petition.

4. On the other hand, learned standing counsel appearing for respondent No. 1 and learned Assistant Government pleader for Endowments appea-ring for respondent Nos.2 to 4 in one voice submit that the petitioners are not the owners of the subject property, further submits that the Assistant Commissioner of Endowments issued a letter to the Panchayat Secretary asking him to stop the construction and revoke the permissions issued to the encroachers, when lega1 action is being taken by the concerned officia-ls obviously, it will cause "hardship" to the miscreants such as the petitioners herdin. Further submits that the orders of this Court in W.P.No.389 13 of 2015 merely speaks about not to dispossess the petitioners in the said writ petition except in accordance with law and in the present case on hald the petitioners failed to establish as to how the said observation of this Court is going to heip them in retaining illegal occupation of the subject property. The respondent herein assures the 3 petitioners herein that they shall be evicted from the subject premises legally with the help of polic personnel in consonance with the provisions of Section 83 and 4 of the Endowments Act 30 of 1987. Further submits that the p titioners do not have any manner of right or entitlement over th subject property as such they are encroachers who are squattin over the property of the subject temple and a-re threateni to carry out illegal constructions in the subject property uch to the detriment of the interest of the subject temple. Furt er submits that it is well settled principle of law that this Court, as rendered a Judgment in W.A. No.1425 of 2024 dated24.l2.2 24 wherein and where by f this Court has directed the petitioners therein to avail alternate remedy ald to approach the Endo ent Tribunal, the said Judgment is squarely applicable to e present facts and the circumstances of the case. Therefore, ey seek to dismiss the Writ Petition.

5. Having regard to the submission made by the respective counsel and after perusing the materi available on record, thrs Court does not see arly reason to interfe with the proceedings of the ofhcia-l respondents as it has bee follow the provisions laid in Secti n 83 and 84 of the assured that they shall 4 Endowments Act 30 of 1987. It is under these circumstances, this Writ Petition does not deserve any consideration. Needless to mention that the petitioners are at liberty to approach Tribuna,l for declaration of their title if thev so desire.

6. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is dismissed No costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if aly, shall stand closed To, //TRUE COPY// SD/. T.JAYASREE REGISTRAR 'fl ON OFFICER Telangana, at HYderabad [OUTI

1. One CC to SRl. M. VIDYASAGAR, Advocate [OP-U-C-] ^- i. o;; cc io sni C.H. sATlsH KUIMAR, Advocate [oPUC] ^ 3. i;; cc.i" cp FoR ENDowrvENTS, High court for the state of 4. Two CD CoPies rBM J '11 HIGH COURT DATED:1910312025 ORDER WP.No.10771 of 2021 IrlF- sr^l 1(: '( ")K i O rl i.) 13 ru8 ilm ! II.T(-HEO o {' DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS