IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 24875 of 2008 Between: Sri Arya Vysya Sangham, Ponnur, Guntur District, rep. by its Secretary, Sri Ch.Veeranjaneyulu S/o. Venkata Subba Rao R/o. Ponnur, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Guntur. 2 The Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Guntur. 3 Sri Karumuri Prakash S/o.Venkateswarlu Ponnur, Guntur District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 a writ, order or direction, more particularly a writ in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments passed in Rc.No.A7/7614/08, dated 14.10.2008 directing the petitioner herein to hand over complete charge of Sri Vasavi Kanyaka Parameswari Ammavari Temple, Ponnur to Sri K.Prakash as illegal, arbitrary, oppose to law and in gross violation of principles of natural justice and the petitioner herein prays that the same may be quashed. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR .M.VIDYASAGAR Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO.24875 OF 2008 ORDER : The petitioner herein is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 for the purpose of maintaining Sri Kanyaka Parameswari Temple, Ponnur. This writ petition is filed in the name of the society represented by Sri Ch.Veeranjaneyulu, describing himself as Secretary of the Society, seeking a declaration that the order passed by the 1st respondent dated 14.10.2008 directing Sri Ch. Veeranjaneyulu and other members of the Trust Board of the Temple to hand over the management of the temple as well as the records and movable and immovable properties to the 3rd respondent herein is arbitrary and illegal. It is not in dispute that the members of the Trust Board of Sri Kanyaka Parameswari Temple, Ponnur, earlier filed W.P.No.18050 of 1999 seeking a declaration that the religious and charitable institutions established by a person belonging to a particular denomination are entitled for the benefit under Article 26 of the Constitution of India and the provisions of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short, ‘the Act’) cannot be applied to the said institutions. The said writ petition was disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court along with similar other writ petitions by order dated 28.12.2001 leaving it open to the petitioners therein to approach the Deputy Commissioner seeking either rescindment of the orders of registration or to get the declaration that those institutions were meant for the benefit of particular religious denominations. Thereafter O.A.Nos.27 & 30 of 2002 have been preferred and the same are pending before the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments. Having regard to the pendency of the said proceedings the petitioner herein contends that the impugned proceedings directing handing over the records as well as the movable and immovable properties of the temple to the 3rd respondent is arbitrary and illegal. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material on record. In the counter-affidavits filed on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 & 3, the fact that the petitioner society was registered in the year 1974 has not been disputed. However, it is stated that Sri Ch. Veeranjaneyulu who deposed to the present writ petition describing him as Secretary of the society in question was only one of the trustees appointed in the year 1994 and the term of the said Trust Board expired long back and thereafter though a Fit person was appointed under the provisions of the Act the petitioner and other trustees did not hand over the records. Subsequently, vide G.O.Ms.No.1572, dated 24.10.2006 and G.O.Ms.No.1098, dated 11.09.2008 the temple as well as the choultry and Annadana Satram managed by Arya Vysa Community were exempted from the operation of Sections 15 and 29 of the Act. Pursuant thereto, a General Body Meeting was held on 28.09.2008 in which the 3rd respondent herein was unanimously elected as Chairman apart from eight other members. Thereafter, the newly elected managing committee gave a representation dated 1.10.2008 to the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments requesting to pass appropriate orders for handing over the management of the temple to the newly elected committee. Accordingly, the impugned proceedings have been issued. It is also pleaded by the 3rd respondent that pursuant to the impugned proceedings though two notices dated 22.10.2008 and 01.11.2008 by registered post were issued to the deponent Ch. Veeranjaneyulu, they were returned unserved. Hence the notices were pasted on the door of the house of the petitioner and thereafter newly elected committee took charge of management and possession of the movable and immovable properties on 03.11.2008. The contents of the said counter-affidavit have been substantiated by the counter-affidavit filed by the 1st respondent – Deputy Commissioner of Endowments. As could be seen from the material placed before this Court, the temple in question has been exempted form the operation of Sections 15 and 29 of the Act. Admittedly, the petitioner herein along with four others was appointed as trustees of the said temple under the provisions of the Act much prior to G.O.Ms.No.1572, dated 24.10.2006 and G.O.Ms.No.1098, dated 11.09.2008. Even the term of the said Trust Board expired long back. At any rate once the temple in question has been exempted from the operation of Sections 15 & 29 of the Act, the petitioner and other trustees cannot claim any right to manage the temple affairs. Hence, a new committee has been rightly elected. The fact that the deponent Sri Ch. Veeranjaneyulu did not contest the elections is also not in dispute. In the circumstances, the mere fact that O.A.Nos.27 & 30 of 2002 are pending before the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments is of no consequence and on that ground the impugned proceedings cannot be held to be bad. For the aforesaid reasons, the impugned order which does not suffer from any infirmity warrants no interference by this Court. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. _____________ G.ROHINI, J. Dt. 24.12.2008 gbs