HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.12152 of 2008 Date : 15.12.2011 Between : B. Kodanda Ramudu. …..Petitioner And Sri Ramalingeswara Swamy Vari Devastanam, Tadimalla village, rep. by its Manager & another. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.12152 of 2008 ORDER : This writ petition is filed seeking directions by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents in issuing the auction notice, dated 01.06.2008 to conduct auction in respect of item No.4 i.e. Ac.3.80 cents of dry land in Sy.No.7/13 of Katakoteswaram village of Nidadavole Mandal in West Godavari District, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of A.P.Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Endowments Act’). It is the case of petitioner that he is a landless poor person and is cultivating tenant of land admeasuring Ac.3.80 cents belonging to the 1st respondent-temple in Sy.No.7/13 of Katakoteswaram village in Nidadavole Mandal of West Godavari District. It is stated that when steps were being taken to dispossess him, he approached the Tenancy Tribunal under A.P. (Andhra Area) Tenancy Act, 1956 by filing ATC.No.6 of 1996, in which, a compromise was affected before the Lok Adalat at Kovvur, on 21.07.2001, allowing the petitioner to continue as tenant subject to enhancing the rent to Rs.5,000/- per annum. It is stated that though he is continuing in possession of the said land as per the settlement made before the Lok Adalat, the impugned notice is issued to auction the very same land. Mainly, it is the case of the petitioner that as he is a landless poor person, in view of proviso to Section 82 of the Endowments Act, he is entitled to continue in possession. Counter affidavits are filed by the respondents. In the counter filed by the 1st respondent-Devastanam, while denying the allegations made by the petitioner, it is stated that there is no lessor-lessee relationship between the temple and the petitioner. It is stated that the petitioner had approved lease for the entire land for the period from 1988-89 to 1992-93 vide proceedings of the Commissioner, Endowments, at the rate of Rs.2,050/- per annum, and though the said lease is expired, the petitioner is continued to be in possession of land as an encroacher and is paying damages at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per annum from 2001 to 2007, but, he is due Rs.10,000/- towards damages for 2006 and 2007 and Rs.5,000/- towards 2008. In the counter, it is further stated that pursuant to impugned notice, though auction was held, the same was not confirmed in view of the interim orders passed by this Court. In this case, it is to be noticed that the petitioner has not obtained any declaration by approaching competent authority i.e. Assistant Commissioner of Endowments certifying that he is a landless poor person. In the absence of any such inquiry being conducted and order being passed by the competent authority, this Court cannot examine the claim of the petitioner that he is a landless poor person in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In any event, it is to be noticed that the auction notice, dated 01.06.2008, is issued for a period of three years and even that said period of lease has also come to an end during the pendency of this writ petition. While it is true that the petitioner approached the Tenancy Tribunal under the provisions of the A.P. (Andhra Area) Tenancy Act, 1956, but in view of the amendment made to Section 82 of the Endowments Act, the said Act itself is not made applicable to the lands belonging to the Endowment institutions. When the matter is taken up, it is contended by the learned counsel for petitioner that he is intending to approach the competent authority, seeking to declare him as small farmer so as to avail the benefit as per the proviso under Section 82 of the Endowments Act. In view of the expiry of the period for which the auction is notified, and as the petitioner intends to approach the competent authority for declaration as landless poor person, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, permitting the petitioner to move the appropriate authority seeking declaration as landless poor. However, there shall be a direction to the respondents to maintain status with regard to possession for a period of three months from today, and provided the petitioner deposits the entire arrears due to the 1st respondent-Devastanam within a period of four weeks from today. It is also made clear that if the petitioner moves any application seeking to declare him as landless poor, it is open for the competent authority to consider it independently, and pass appropriate orders. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 15th December 2011 ajr