THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 18067 OF 2010 DATE: 28.07.2010 Between: Ravindra Prasad ..... PETITIONER AND Tulja Bhavan Dharmasala, Kachiguda, Hyderabad, rep. by its Manager .....RESPONDENT The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 18067 OF 2010 ORDER : This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondent in trying to close the wall in Door No.3-4-6 by removing the gate connecting the petitioner’s house in premises No.3-4-780/1, Kachiguda, Hyderabad as arbitrary and illegal. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was granted a lease in respect of the premises No.3-4-6 belonging to the respondent and the lease period expired on 01.01.2009 itself. As the petitioner failed to vacate the premises, the respondent initiated proceedings under Section 83 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short, ‘the Act’) and the proceedings are pending. During the subsistence of lease the petitioner made a representation stating that as he is having his private house abutting the leased premises, he may be allowed to have a passage through the leased premises to his private house. Having considered the said request, the Commissioner of Endowments, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad vide proceedings dated 14.10.2004 permitted the petitioner to use the passage, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall claim no easementary right for the said passage and the date of expiry of lease of premises No.3-4-6 shall be the date of closing the passage with his own funds. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner gave an undertaking dated 16.10.2004 stating that he would bound by the condition imposed in the proceedings dated 14.10.2004. In the circumstances, the respondent by notice dated 09.07.2010 called upon the petitioner to remove the gate and reconstruct the wall since the period of lease had expired on 01.01.2009. The petitioner submitted his explanation dated 12.07.2010 and after considering the same the respondent by letter dated 21.07.2010 has reiterated the stand that the petitioner is not entitled to use the passage and the door any longer. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. Having regard to the admitted facts that the lease in favour of the petitioner came to an end on 01.01.2009 by afflux of time and the permission to use the passage by erecting a gate on the wall was granted by the respondent at the request of the petitioner making it clear that he was entitled to enjoy the said benefit as long as the lease was subsisting, I do not find any substance in the contention of the petitioner that the impugned action of the respondent is arbitrary and illegal. The mere fact that the respondent is receiving the rents does not confer any right on the petitioner to use the passage and the door in question. Similarly the pendency of the eviction proceedings under Section 83 of the Act are irrelevant so far as the facility granted to the petitioner to use the passage during the subsistence of the lease. The petitioner is bound by the undertaking given by him on 16.10.2004 and therefore, the action of the respondent in directing closure of the passage cannot be held to be arbitrary or illegal on any ground whatsoever. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. _____________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 28.07.2010 Ivd