IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21394 of 2000 Between: Kandala Venkata Narasimhacharyulu. … Petitioner And Government of Andhra Pradesh reptd., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Andhra Pradesh Secretariat, Hyderabad and three others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: --- Counsel for respondents: AGP for Revenue. This Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Certiorari to quash order dated 4-7-2000 in Case No.C3/11/97 passed by respondent No.2. At the hearing, there is no representation for the petitioner. Heard the learned Assistant Government Pleader and perused the record. The dispute pertains to Ac.40.35 guntas of land in Survey Nos.199, 200, 220, 221, 223 and 224 of Chendur village, Nalgonda District. The petitioner is a Pujari of Sri Seetha Rama Swamy Temple of Chendur village. On 31-3-1992 respondent No.3 issued Occupancy Right Certificate (for short “ORC”) under the proviso to Section 4 of the A.P. (Telangana Area) Abolition of Imams Act, 1955 (for short “the 1955 Act”) in favour of the said temple with the word “Pujari” mentioned in the brackets. Questioning the said order, respondent No.4 filed an appeal before respondent No.2 under Section 24(1) of the 1955 Act with the prayer to delete the word “Pujari” from the ORC. The said appeal was allowed on 2-3-1994, questioning which the petitioner filed CRP No.1553 of 1994 in this Court. This Court by order dated 14-10- 1996 allowed the said CRP., on the ground that sufficient opportunity was not given to the petitioner. Accordingly, order dated 2-3-1998 passed by respondent No.2 was set aside; and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration. After remand, respondent No.2 passed order dated 4-7-2000, which is assailed in this Writ Petition. I have perused the impugned order. In his order respondent No.2 discussed, in detail, the record, such as “Wasoolbaqi Bandobast” of Chendur village for 1351 Fasli and came to the conclusion that the land in question constitutes Inam granted in favour of the Deity of the temple and the same was given for worship and upkeep of the temple. He also stated that the Pujari of the temple is entitled to be in possession of the land and enjoy the same subject to his rendering service to the temple. Respondent No.2 also referred to the provisions of the 1955 Act and also the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short “the 1987 Act”) and held that with the abolition of Inams belonging to the religious institutions by Section 3(1) of the 1955 Act, the ORC of the said land shall be granted in favour of the Deity only under Section 4(1) of the said Act read with Section 76 of the 1987 Act as the Deity alone was in possession of the said land through its Pujari and granting of occupancy rights of Inam lands in the name of Deity cannot be treated as a fresh grant as it is only conversion of the pre-existing tenure. He also relied upon the judgment of this Court reported in 1988(1) ALT 281 to arrive at the conclusion that the pre-existing rights are not taken away by the grant of ORC in favour of the temple and no individual would acquire any right or title over the lands except the institution concerned. I have carefully examined the reasons given by respondent No.2 and am satisfied that the same being germane and sound, I do not find any reason to interfere with this well considered order of respondent No.2. At any rate, the interest of the petitioner is not affected since he is entitled to enjoy the property so long as he continues to render service to the temple. For the above-mentioned reasons, the Writ Petition is dismissed. ------------------------------------ ---- C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date:25-07-2008 MNR