HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20274 of 2009 Dated: 17-06-2010 Between: Gunduboyina Balaiah. … Petitioner And The Tahsildar, A.S.Pet Mandal, Nellore District & others. … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20274 of 2009 ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks for directions by way of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of respondents 1 to 3, on the representations filed by him against respondents 4 and 5 on 13.10.2008 and 27.10.2008, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner claims that he is in possession of land admeasuring Ac.4.92 cents covered by Survey No.19-1, situated at Kupparupadu village of A.S.Pet Mandal in Nellore District. The grievance of the petitioner, as stated in his representations, dated 13.10.2008 and 27.10.2008, is that he is in possession of the land belonging to the Devasthanam, which is constructed by his fore-fathers, but there is interference by the Village Sarpanch and also the 5th respondent, without any authority of law, and that they are trying to take possession of the said land. The written instructions, dated 06.10.2009, issued by the Station House Officer, A.S.Pet Police Station to the learned Government Pleader, are placed before this Court. A perusal of the same shows that the land in question belongs to the temple and the petitioner was in possession as he was rendering services to the temple. But, there was a representation from the villagers and the representatives of the Panchayat that the petitioner is not rendering any services to the temple and they sought for auctioning of the temple land. It is stated that by beat of ‘tom tom’, the auction was notified and the 5th respondent has emerged as the highest bidder, to whom, possession was delivered on 22.05.2008. It is categorically stated that from 22.05.2008 onwards, the 5th respondent is in possession and enjoyment of the said land, by cultivating the same. If the petitioner is aggrieved of conducting auction and delivering possession of temple land to the 5th respondent, it is open for him to approach the higher authorities and seek for appropriate steps under the provisions of the A.P.Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987. When the auction is conducted and possession is already delivered to respondent No.5, by mere complaint of alleged dispossession without mentioning the auction proceedings, the petitioner cannot seek for any relief in this writ petition. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 17th June 2010 ajr