IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 18933 of 2008 Between: Bijjula Gopal Reddy S/o.Late Shali Reddy R/o.Diguvapadu Village, Kurnool Mandal & District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department Office, Kurnool, Opp: Birla Factory, Kurnool. 2 Sri Anjaneyaswamy Temple, Diguvapadu, Kurnool Mandal and District, rep. by its Chairman Sri M.Veerasekhara Reddy, R/o.Diguvapadu Village, Kurnool Mandal & District. .....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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in proposing to auction the lease hold rights in Sy.No. 194 to an extent of Ac.13.42 situated in Diguvapadu Village belonging to the 2nd respondent temple on 5.9.2008 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and consequently direct the respondents not to auction the lease hold rights in Sy.No. 194 to an extent of Ac. 13.42 situated in Diguvapadu Village belonging to the 2nd respondent temple on 5.9.2008 and to pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.C.PRAKASH REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following : ORDER: Sri Anjaneyaswamy Temple, Diguvapadu Village, Kurnool Mandal and District, owns an extent of Acs.13.42 cents of land in survey No.194. The leasehold rights in respect of the said land were put to auction in the year 2005, for a period of three years. The petitioner became the highest bidder for a sum of Rs.52,000/- per year. The lease expired in May, 2008. Since fresh auction was not conducted, the petitioner continued in possession and has raised crop by depositing a sum of Rs.18,000/-. The respondents have now initiated steps for putting the leasehold rights to auction. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the action of the respondents and seeks appropriate directions. Heard Sri C.Prakash Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Endowments for the ﬁrst respondent and Sri V.T.M.Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for the second respondent. The lease in favour of the petitioner was for a period of three years and it was granted on the basis of the auction conducted for that purpose. The respondents were required to take necessary steps to conduct the auction before the expiry of the lease. Whether it was on account of the negligence on the part of the second respondent or the ﬁrst respondent, the auction was not held before the expiry of the lease. The petitioner, who was continuing possession of the land, had raised the crop for the current agriculture season. He is said to have deposited a sum of Rs.18,000/-. It is rather curious that having collected a sum of Rs.18,000/- from the petitioner, the respondents are now proceeding to conduct the auction. They do not seem to be concerned about the crop raised by the petitioner. It is on account of the irresponsible conduct of such oﬃcials that the properties held by the religious institutions are not put to proper use. In fact, necessary action needs to be taken against the persons, who are responsible for not conducting the auction, before the expiry of the lease. The petitioner has not only paid part of the lease amount to the second respondent, but also made investment for raising the crop. Therefore, he cannot be evicted for the current season. At the same time, the interests of the temple need to be protected. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing that the petitioner shall be continued as lessee for the current agriculture season on his payment of Rs.75,000/- as lease amount. The respondents shall take necessary steps for conducting auction of leasehold rights for the subsequent period, before the expiry of the current year. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ Dt.02.09.2008 L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J Note: Issue C.C. by tomorrow. (B/o) GJ