IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 18043 of 2007 Between: Sagi Venkata Rama Raju, S/o. Gopal Raju, R/o.Yazali Village, Karlapalem Mandal Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Deputy Commissioner, Endowments Department, Guntur. 2 The Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, Guntur. 3 The Executive Officer, Sri Kasi Visweswara Swamy Temple, Yazali Village, Karlapalem Mandal, Guntur District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents in not waiving the maktha paid by the petitioner in advance to the tune of Rs. 2,000/- on 26-7-2006 for the year 2006 in spite of G.O.Rt.NO. 2711, dt. 22-12-2006 is highly illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to waive the said maktha for the year 2006 paid by the petitioner in advance in respect of Sy.No. 716 to the extent of Ac. 6.97 of wet land situated at Yazali Village, Karlapalem Mandal, Guntur District and pass such to her order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deem ﬁt and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.RAVI KUMAR MOTURI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following ORDER: The petitioner is a lessee in respect of Acs.6.97 cents of wet land in survey No.716 of Karlapalem Mandal, Guntur District, owned by Sri Kasi Visweswara Swamy Temple, Yazali Village, Karlapalem Mandal, Guntur District (for short ‘the Temple’) from the year 2006 onwards. The petitioner states that on account of the cyclone that occurred in the year 2006, the Government issued G.O.Rt.No.2711, dated 22.12.2006, waiving the maktha for the land owned by the endowment institutions. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite such a waiver, the respondents are insisting on payment of maktha. On behalf of the Temple, a counter-aﬃdavit is ﬁled, stating that the petitioner did not pay any maktha so far, for any period and under the guise of the said G.O., he is deriving beneﬁt from the land without paying anything to the Temple. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Endowments and the learned Standing Counsel for the Temple. This is another instance to demonstrate as to how the properties held by religious institutions have become soft targets. The Government was very benevolent in issuing the G.Os., waiving the maktha, without even verifying as to whether the crops raised by a lessee over such lands have been damaged at all. Even if there was a cyclone, relief could have been granted only to such of the farmers whose crops are damaged. Be that as it may, the petitioner did not pay any maktha not only for the year 2006, but also for the subsequent years. Having become the highest bidder and quoted the maktha, he cannot continue as a lessee without paying the maktha. Had he been sincere, he could have paid the maktha for the subsequent years, even while making a claim for the year 2006-2007. This Court does not ﬁnd any bona fides on the part of the petitioner. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. It is, however, made clear that it shall be open to the petitioner to make a representation with regard to payment of maktha for the year 2006-2007, only after payment of maktha for the subsequent period, within ﬁfteen days from today. In default, it shall be open to the respondents to evict the petitioner, without initiating any further proceedings. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:13.10.2008. kdl