IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No : 10512 of 2008 Between: Thokkula Dasaradharamayya, S/o. Ramachandrayya, Hindu, R/o. 8-9-1, Godavari Bund, Near Sankarmath, Cement Casting Business, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The Deputy Commissioner, Endowments Department, Kakinada. 2. Sri Sanjeeva Anjaneya Swami Vari Devasthanam, Rajahmundry, represented by its Archaka-cum-Trustee-Mattam Venkata Subramanyam, S/o Krishna- Murthy, R/o 8-9-1, Godavari Bund, Rajahmundry. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue a WRIT OF CERTIORARI or any other appropriate WRIT, ORDER or DIRECTION quashing the order of the 1st respondent Dt.3.4.2008 in O.A.114/2007 and pass such further or other orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.CHANDRA SEKHAR ILAPAKURTI Counsel for the Respondents.: V.T.M.PRASAD, S.C FOR ENDOWNMENTS The Court made the following : W.P.No.10512 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking quashing of the order of the 1st respondent-Deputy Commissioner, Endowments Department, Kakinada, dated 03.04.2008 in O.A.No.114 of 2007, whereby the petitioner is declared as an encroacher within the definition of Section 83 of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 as he is in occupation of the premises without any valid lease and directed the petitioner to remove the encroachment made by him over the property and handover the vacant possession of the same to the 2nd respondent institution within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order. Undisputedly, against the impugned order, there is an alternative remedy by way of suit under sub Section (2) of Section 84 of the Act. Since the petitioner has effective and efficacious remedy of suit before the Civil Court, I am of the considered view that this writ petition is not maintainable. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. However, since the petitioner is apprehending that he may be evicted from out of the land in question, he is at liberty to approach the Civil Court and file a suit within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, the petitioner shall not be evicted from the land in question. No costs. ____________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 02-05-2008 Note: Furnish C.C. by tomorrow. (Bo) Gsn.