IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 2576 of 2009 Between: Nand Gopal Shah S/o. Late Mahant Murali Shah 15-6-124, Hanuman Mandir, Kolsawadi, Begum Bazar, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner, Endowments Department, Abids near Aditya Hosptial, Tilak Road, Hyderabad. 2 The Sub-Registrar, Doodbowli, Bhahadhurpura, Hyderabad. .....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, order or direction specially in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to register the Document in relation to the land in T.S.No.40, situated at Kolsawadi, Hyderabad bearing Municipal No.15-6-124 as and when presented by the petitioner or his representatives, if necessary by directing the respondent No.1 to accord sanction for the purpose of constructing a building and running a school within the said premises. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.MAHADEV ANYARAMBHATLA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner claims to be the son of Mahanth of Sri Hanuman Temple, Kolswadi, Hyderabad, in premises bearing No.15-6-124. He intends to enter into a development agreement, in respect of 475 square yards of land in T.S.No.40. For that purpose, a document is said to have been presented before the second respondent for registration. The second respondent refused to register the document, on the ground that according to the information available to him, the land belongs to Mutt/temple. Placing reliance upon certain documents, the petitioner submits that the objection raised by the second respondent cannot be sustained in law, and prays for a direction to the second respondent to register the document. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Revenue and learned Government Pleader for Endowments. Except placing reliance upon certain vague and uncertain information furnished by different authorities, the petitioner is not able to satisfy the Court that he is the absolute owner of the property in T.S.No.40. Even assuming that the ownership of the Mutt for the said land is doubtful, the petitioner cannot derive a right out of it. He has to establish his absolute right over the property, before he could transfer it in favour of third parties. Inasmuch as the petitioner is said to be in enjoyment of the property in his capacity as son of Mahanth, associated with the Mutt itself, the only alternative for him is to approach the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, or the authority constituted under Section 87 of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short ‘the Act’), with a petition to declare the character of the land. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to avail the remedy under Section 87 of the Act. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.12.02.2009. GJ