IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO. 1205 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 26.7.2007 in WP No. 25583 of 2000 on the file of the High Court.) Between: The Executive Officer, Full Addl. Charge, Sri Maha Ganapathi Prasanna Venkateswara, Sri Ayyappa, Sri Shirdi Saibaba, etc. Temple, Seethammadhara, North Extension, Visakhapatnam ..... APPELLANT AND Shirdi Sai Baba Spiritual Centre, Behind SFS School, Seethammadhara, Rep.by its Managing Trustee Sri T.S. Rajeshwaran and others .....RESPONDENTS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 20029 of 2009 Between: Sri Maha Ganapathi Prasanna Venkateswara Swamy, Ayyappa Shirdi Saibaba, etc. Temple, Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam ..... PETITIONER AND Shirdi Sai Annadanam Trust, Seethammadhara, Rep.by its Managing Trustee Machiraju Ramagopal and others .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following common: COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) The above writ petition is filed by Sri Maha Ganapathi Prasanna Venkateswara Swamy, Ayyappa Shirdi Saibaba, etc. Temple, Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam, represented by its Executive Officer seeking a writ of mandamus declaring action of the first and second respondents therein viz., Shiridi Sai Annadanam Trust and Shiridi Sai Baba Spiritual Centre, Seethammadhara, represented by their Managing Trustee, in collecting the donations in the name of Annadanam Trust while using the petitioner’s temple premises without rendering accounts as illegal, arbitrary and violative of the provisions of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for brevity the Act 30 of 1987) and consequently to direct them to render the accounts under the supervision of the Deputy Commissioner, Endowments Department, Visakhapatnam. Without adverting to the merits, a cursory look at the prayer sought for in the above writ petition abundantly makes it clear that mandamus is sought against the respondents 1 and 2 therein, which do not fall within the definition of State and, therefore, no writ lie against the said respondents. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable. No order as to costs. Adverting to the above writ appeal, order dated 26.7.2007 passed in WP No. 25583 of 2000 by a learned single Judge allowing the same, is assailed by the Executive Officer, Sri Maha Ganapathi Prasanna Venkateswara, Sri Ayyappa, Sri Shirdi Saibaba, etc. Temple, Seethammadhara, North Extension, Visakhapatnam, which is the writ petitioner in W.P. No. 20029 of 2009. By the order impugned in the Writ Appeal, the learned Single Judge observed that in terms of the order dated 14.12.2001 passed by this court, the filled up hundies were directed to be opened in the temple in the presence of Assistant Commissioner and the amount so collected, was directed to be invested in fixed deposit in the joint account and ultimately directed that the fixed deposit kept in the joint account be refunded to the Trust Board of first respondent herein, which is managing affairs of the temple. The first respondent herein has filed the above writ petition seeking a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the proceedings RC No. G4/39151/2000 dated 3.11.2000 whereby Executive Officer was appointed to the first respondent temple and ultimately sought to quash the same and declare that Saibaba Temple at Shirdi Spiritual Centre, Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam is not a Hindu Religious Institution or Endowment and does not fall within the purview of Act 30 of 1987. The grievance of the writ petitioner – first respondent in the present Appeal is that the third respondent in the appeal, ignoring the ratio laid down in Deputy Commissioner of Endowments Vs. Saibaba Samsthanam ([1]) holding that the Act 30 of 1987 is not applicable to a temple of Shirdi Saibaba, has issued notice dated 16.10.2000 directing it to file an application for registration under Section 43 of the Act 30 of 1987. Pursuant thereto, the first respondent herein had submitted representation dated 1.12.2000 to exclude it from the administrative control and to afford an opportunity of hearing. But the third respondent without affording an opportunity, has passed the order dated 3.11.2000, appointing Executive Officer to the first respondent temple. The learned Single Judge by the order impugned herein observing that in terms of GO Ms. No. 1572 Revenue (Endowments.1/1) Department dated 24.10.2006, the Shirdi Saibaba Temples and Sri Kanyakaparameshwari Temples are exempted from operation of Secs. 15 and 29 of the Act 30 of 1987 has allowed the writ petition directing the respondents 2 to 4 herein to handover the management of the Shirdi Saibaba Temple, Seethammadhara to the first respondent Temple Trust. The learned Single Judge further directed to refund the fixed deposit amount lying in the joint account to the first respondent Trust. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant, after seeking leave to file the Appeal has filed the present Writ Appeal inter alia contending that the appellant is a Hindu Religious Institution in terms of Gazette Notification dated 27.6.1994 at Sl. No.848 published as required under Sec. 6(c)(ii) of the At 30 of 1987. As can be seen from the order impugned herein, the learned Single Judge noticing GO Ms. No. 1572 Revenue (Endowments.1/1) Department dated 24.10.2006 granting exemption of Shirdi Saibaba Temples and Sri Kanyakaparameshwari Temples from the operation of Secs. 15 and 29 of Act 30 of 1987 has allowed the writ petition, as stated above. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the Gazette Notification No.6-3 dated 27.6.1994 published in terms of Sec. 6(c)(ii) of Act 30 of 1987, whereunder at Sl.No.848, the appellant temple is gazetted to be a Hindu Religious Institution, the order impugned cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside and is accordingly set aside. However, the writ petitioner – first respondent is at liberty to agitate its rights before appropriate forum in view of the gazette notification dated 27.06.1994. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner – first respondent submits that the O.A. No. 141 of 2001 filed before the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments at Kakinada, (re-numbered as OA No.20 of 2002 on transfer to Deputy Commissioner, Endowments, Visakhapatnam) seeking to declare that the writ petitioner – first respondent is not a Hindu Religious Institution or Endowment and that Act 30 of 1987 does not apply to it, was withdrawn as not pressed in view of the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No.25583 of 2000 dated 26.7.2007, which is impugned in this Writ Appeal. He contends that in view of the impugned order being set aside in the present Writ Appeal, liberty be given to agitate its rights before the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Visakhapatnam. Accordingly, while directing the Deputy Commissioner, Endowments, Visakhapatnam to restore the said O.A. to its original file, liberty is reserved to the writ petitioner – first respondent herein, to pursue the remedies in the above O.A. and the Deputy Commissioner, Endowments, Visakhapatnam, is directed to dispose of the same in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction, the Writ Appeal stands disposed of. No order as to costs. ____________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari __________________ Justice Sanjay Kumar January 22, 2010 MAS. [1] 1991(1) ALT 164