IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH: HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH (25th) DAY OF NOVEMBER WO THOUSAND AND TEN Present: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY W.P.No.10195 of 2001 Between: E.Venkatramanaiah (Died) Enam Vijaya Bhaskar … Petitioner And: The Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Endowments Department, Chittoor & another … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY W.P.No.10195 OF 2001 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the first respondent in registering the petitioner-temple and issuing certificate No.840 under Section 43 of Act 30 of 1987 and appointing the second respondent as person-in-management of petitioner-temple by proceedings dated 30-07-2000, as illegal and arbitrary and for setting aside the same. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Endowments for the respondents. Perused the record. 3. According to the petitioner, he is Dharmakartha of Sri Venkatateswara Swamy temple. He complains that without conducting any enquiry the first respondent issued the impugned proceedings dated 30-07-2000 under Section 43 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions & Endowments Act, 1987 (for short ‘the Act’) registering the subject temple and issuing Certificate No.840 and in pursuance thereof appointing the second respondent as the person-in-management of the subject temple. 4. The learned Government Pleader for Endowments would submit that an enquiry was, in fact, conducted by the Revenue Inspector in pursuance of the application given by the second respondent and thereafter the certificate of registration was issued. Admittedly, the second respondent is a stranger to the temple. Nothing is placed on record to show that the second respondent is either a trustee or person-in-charge of the management of the temple. Nothing is also placed on record to show that on receipt of any application from trustee or other person- in-charge of management of the temple, an enquiry under Section 43 of the Act was conducted before issuing the impugned certificate of registration and appointing the second respondent as person-in-management. 5. Section 43 of the Act states that the trustee or other person incharge of the management of every charitable or religious institution or endowment shall make an application for its registration to the Assistant Commissioner. Sub-section (4) of the Act specifies various particulars that the application should contain. Sub-section (5) mandates that on receipt of the application, the Assistant Commissioner shall, after making an enquiry as he thinks fit and hearing any person having interest in the institution or endowment, pass an order directing its registration and grant to the trustee or other person a certificate of registration containing the particulars. Sub-section (11) contemplates a penal provision rendering the trustee or other person liable for punishment if he fails to apply for registration of an institution. Thus, a statutory duty is cast on the trustee or other person-in-management of the temple to make an application for registration of the temple. On receipt of such application, the Assistant Commissioner is bound to make enquiry and after hearing any person having interest in the institution, pass the order directing registration of the institution. In the present case, admittedly no application has been received from the petitioner, who is Dharmakartha of the subject temple. Admittedly, no enquiry was also conducted by the Assistant Commissioner in pursuance of the application from the petitioner Dharma Kartha. 6. Under those circumstances, the impugned proceedings granting certificate of registration to the subject temple and appointing the second respondent as person-in- management, are legally unsustainable, as they were not issued in accordance with the provisions of Section 43 of the Act and hence they are held liable to be set aside. The matter is remanded to the first respondent for conducting fresh enquiry after receiving application from the petitioner, as contemplated under Section 43 of the Act and pass appropriate orders regarding issuance of certificate of registration in respect of the subject temple. The petitioner shall make an application within three months under Section 43(1) of the Act and the first respondent shall conduct an enquiry and pass appropriate orders within three months from the date of receiving the application. 7. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 25th November,2010 Lrkm.