IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 19200 of 2008 Between: Bandela Sathemma, W/o. Bangaraiah, Ryali Village, Atreyapuram Mandal, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Regional Joint Commissioner, Multi Zone-I, Endowment Department, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 2 The Assistant Commissioner, Endowment Department, Rajahmundry, East Godavary District. 3 Sri Umakamandaleswara Swamyvari Temple, Rep. byits Manager, Ryali, Atreyapuram Mandal, East Godavari District. 4 Eli Venkanna, S/o. Venkataswamy, Ryali Village, Atreyapuram Mandal, Est Godavari 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 to issue a writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction, declaring the action of the respondents in trying to dispossess the petitioner from Ac. 1.00 cents in R.S.No. 68/2 situated at Ryali Village, Atreypuram Mandal, East Godavari District as illegal, arbitrary, colorable exercise of powers and for a consequential order directing the respondents drop all further proceedings in this regard and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.CH.DHANAMJAYA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 19200 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner was a lessee in respect of Ac.1.00 of land in R.S.No.68/2 of Ryali Village, Atreyapuram Mandal, East Godavari District, belonging to Sri Umakamandaleswara Swamy Temple. The lease stood terminated by operation of Section 82 of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act (for short ‘the Act’) 30 of 1987. The eﬀorts of the petitioner to be declared as landless poor did not fructify. Respondents 2 and 3 conducted auction of leasehold rights on 06.08.2008 and the 4th respondent emerged as the highest bidder for a sum of Rs.28,000/-. The grievance of the petitioner is that banana crop raised by her is yet to be harvested and the respondents are not permitting her to harvest the crop. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Endowments and the learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.3 It is no doubt true that the petitioner is no more the lessee of the land and her previous lease stood terminated by operation of Section 82 of Act 30 of 1987. As required under the Act and the Rules made thereunder, respondents 2 and 3 conducted auction of the leasehold rights and no irregularity in the auction is pointed out. The petitioner states that she needs some time to harvest the standing crop. Learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent, on the other hand, submits that the possession of the land has already been handed over to the 4th respondent, on deposit of the lease amount. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, granting 10 days’ time from today, to the petitioner, to harvest the crop, in whatever form it is, under the supervision of the Manager of the 3rd respondent-Temple. The possession of the land shall continue to be with the 4th respondent and the facility given to the petitioner to harvest the crop would cease with eﬀect from 15.09.2008. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 05.09.2008 Note: Issue C.C. in two days. (B/o) JSU ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 19200 of 2008 Date: 05.09.2008 JSU