High Court · 2025

Bachu Srinivas, S/o. Venkaiah, age 51 years Occ. busincess, Off. TTD Kalyanamandapam Kodada town, Suryapet District. ...PETITIONER AND Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

1. The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Endowment 2. Tirumala Tirupathi Devasstanam(TTD), rep by its Executive Officer, Tirupathi. 3. The Estate officer, TTD Tirupathi 4. The Manager, lncharge of TTD Kalynamandapam Kodada, Suryapeta district. 5. The Deputy Executive officer(TTD), Task Force Team, Hyderabad. ...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 an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the action of the respondent no.3 herein in issued the impugned order dt.19.03-2025 bearing ROC.No.47023(31)17512022-KM SEC-TTD cancelling the license awarded to me for TTD, Kalyanmandapam, kodada, suryapeta district, on the ground of conducting exhibition and forfeiting the License fee amount Rs/- 45,000 and submitted the towards security deposit of Rs/-1 ,25,000/- submitted at the time of tender by the licensee, without any notice and without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard, as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unilateral and unconstitutional and consequently set aside the same IA NO | 1 0F 2025 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 grant stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order dt.1 9.032025 bearing Roc.No.47023 (31)t7512022-KM SEC-TTD issued by the 3rd respondent herein, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. KARUNAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2to5: SRI B. RAJESHWAR REDDY, The Court made the following: ORDER HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9826 OF 2025 ORDER:(ORAL) Thiswritpetitionisfiledbythepetitionerseekingtodeclarethe action of respondent No.3 - the Estate officer, TTD (Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam), in issuing the impugned otdet vide Roc' No'47023(3 1)/ T5l2o22lKMdatedlg.03.2025cancellinghislicenceawardedforTTD, Kodada, Suryapet District' as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional. f{eard Mr. Karunakar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitior.rer'

2. and Mr. B. Rajeshwar Reddy, leamed Standing Counsel lor TTD' appearing for respondents No.2 to 5, and perused the material on record'

3. The case of the petitioner is that respondent No'2 invited tenders for issuance of licences for TTD Kalyanamandapam at Kodad, Suryapet District, and the petitioner was declared as successful tenderer' The petitioner has paid licence fee of Rs'45,000/- (Rupees forty five thousand only) and also fumished security of Rs'1,25,000/- (Rupees one lakh twenty five thousand only) towards Eamest Money Deposit (EMD)' That agreement dated 19-03.2022 was executed in favour of the petitioner and the petitioner has taken over the possession of the Kalyanamandaparn on 06.04.2022: the licence of the petitioner is valid 2 up to 05.04.2027

4. lt is subnritted that as the petitioner could not maintain the said Kalayanamandapam in accordance with the conditions prescribed in the licence, he requested the respondent authorities to accord permission to conduct exhibitions tn the said Kalyanamandapam; the respondent authorities orallr pcrmitted the petitioner to conduct exhibitions. While so, respondcnt No.3 issued the irnpugned order dated 19.03.2025 informing the petitioner that his Iicence has been car.rcelled as he violated the tenrs and conditions of the licence b1. conducting commercial activities in the Kalyanamandapam. Further, that the petitioner demolished pump shed and also part of the cornpound wall, and allotted thc said Kalyanamandapam for commercial activities (organizing Chenetha, Hastha Kala Pradharshana - Ammakaalu), which is wilful violation of the terrns and conditions ol' the licence. The petitioner committed violation/breach of the terms and conditions of the licence, as such, his licence has been cancelled.

5. Leamed counsel for the petitioner submitted that handicrafts exhibition was conducted with the oral permission of the respondent authorities and the same does not amoullt to violation of terms and conditions of the licence. The petitioner never sublet the I 3 kalyanamandapam to any person. Moreover, the respondent authorities permitted the kalyanamandapams in Guntur, Vishakapatnam and Krishna Districts to be used for arts and crafts exhibitions, as evident from the record.

6. Leamed Standing Counsel for TTD, appearing for respondents No.2 to 5 submitted that the permission granted by the TTD in other districts of Andhra Pradesh cannot be a ground to the petitioner to violate terms and conditions of the licence and use the Kalyanamandapam for commercial purposes' The Kalayanamandapam was given only for the purpose of marriage, customary and religious I I purposes. The TTD has not given any oral permission to the petitioner to conduct arts and crafts exhibitions as alleged in this writ petition' tt is not in dispute that the petitioner has used the 7. Kalyanamandapam for commercial activities instead of using it ibr the purposes mentioned in the licence. The contention of the petitioner that oral permission was granted by the respondent authorities for organizing arts and crafts exhibitions is denied by the respondents' The licence does not provide for any such oral permission' As there is violation of terms and conditions of the licence despite several wamings, the 4 impugned order dated 19.03.2025 was issued canceiling the licence of the petitioner. ln any case, such disputed question of facts cannot be decided in a w'it petition.

8. In view of the above, there are no merits in this writ petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this application stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/.T,TIRUMALA DEVI D F'Jry REGISTRAR E:CTION OFFICER . 9n" 99 to SRt KARUNAKAR REDDY, Advocate IOPUCI . Two CCs to Gp FOR ENDOWMET{TS ,High C;r"rt'io,. tn",Strt" of Tetangana at Hyderabad [OUT1 . One CC to SRt' B. RAJESHWAR REDDY, SC FOR TTDS tOpUCl . Two CD Copies To, 1 2 3 4 BIV LS A? I HIGH COURT DATED:7/0412025 ORDER WP.No.9826 of 2025 ,-;G. ot"''q Js- o 25 i\Ph ?025 * OESpAI C C; .at * DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WTTHOUT COSTS 4 %lv