IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 683 of 2009 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 04/03/2009 in WP NO : 4269 OF 2009 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Manglapuri Pullaiah S/o.Venkateswarlu R/o. 9th Ward, Vaddavalli, Sattenapalli Town, Guntur District. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The Sub-Registrar Stamps & Registrations Sattenapalli, Guntur District. 2 The District Registrar Stamps & Registrations Guntur. 3 The District Collector Guntur District Guntur. 4 The Asst. Commissioner Endowments Department Opp. Gunta Ground, Besides Anjaneyaswamy Temple, Naz Center, Guntur. 5 The Manager Sri Venugopalaswamy vaari Temple Sattenapalli, Guntur District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant: MR.B.CHINNAPA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORAL JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Sanjay Kumar) The unsuccessful petitioner is in appeal aggrieved by the order dated 04.03.2009 passed by a learned Single Judge dismissing Writ Petition No. 4269 of 2009. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition was with regard to the action of the first respondent in not accepting his document relating to the land in Sy. No. 359 of Sattenapalli for registration, in view of the Memo No. 108/2006 dated 9.12.2006 issued by the fifth respondent temple. The learned Single Judge took note of the fact that under the provisions of Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, as amended upto date, the transactions relating to different types of lands categorised under clauses (a) to (e) of Sub-Section (1) of Sec.22-A, are prohibited. Under Clause (e), the lands owned by religious institutions and endowments are also included. The learned Single Judge took note of the fact that the fifth respondent – Temple had informed the Registration Authorities that the subject land belongs to it and that in view of the notification issued under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, no transaction pertaining to the said land should be entertained for registration. The learned Single Judge, therefore, held that it is for the petitioner to avail remedies either under Sec. 87 of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 or file an independent suit for determination of his title over the subject property. Sri B.Chinnappa Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the Inam Register to establish the title of his client. A perusal of a copy of the said register discloses that the subject land was registered as Devadayam for the service rendered to the Venu Gopala Swamy Temple, Sattenapalli village, the fifth respondent in the Appeal. The entries in column No.15 of the said register show the names of B.Venkaiah and B. Maisaiah, the two sons of the grantee. It is stated that the petitioner’s aunt inherited the property from her late husband B.Adenna and executed a registered Will in his favour. But the Inam Register shows that B.Maisiah, who was one of the sons of the original grantee, was survived by a son along with his sister-in-law and two nephews. No details are forthcoming as to the progression of the inheritance, which resulted in the petitioner alone acquiring title over the subject land. The learned counsel also relied upon the pattadar passbook issued recently in the year 2007 in the name of the petitioner with respect to the subject land. Any amount of doubt arises as to the determination of title over the subject property. The Inam Register discloses the names of two sons of the grantee whereas the petitioner claims the property as that of his paternal aunt alone. That apart, the Inam Register makes is clear that the land was endowed as Devadayam for the services rendered to the fifth respondent – Temple. No details are forthcoming as to whether the petitioner or his predecessor rendered any service to the fifth respondent temple, as per the terms of the grant. Further, it is stated that a Revision has been filed by the fifth respondent temple against the pattas issue in respect of the subject land and that the same is pending. In the light of these disputed questions regarding the title over the said land and the fact that a notification is said to have been issued under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, at the behest of the fifth respondent temple, the learned Single Judge rightly held that the matter has to be adjudicated either under the Endowments Act or by filing a separate civil suit, if the same is permissible under law. Such contentious issues are not amenable to resolution in a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. We therefore find no merit in this writ appeal and accordingly confirm the order of the learned Single Judge. The Writ Appeal is dismissed, but with no order as to costs. ____________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari __________________ Justice Sanjay Kumar June 22, 2009 MAS.