IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO : 12909 of 2009 Between: Addala Venkata Rama Raju S/o.Ramachandra Raju D.No.10-47, Durganagar, Vepagunta, Visakhapatnam. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Ministry of Endowments, represented by its Principal Secretary, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner of Endowments, Hyderabad. 3 Sri Varaha Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Temple, Simhachalam, represented by its Executive Officer, Simhachalam, Visakhapatnam 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 declaring the impugned action of the 3rd respondent in issuing eviction notice Rc.No.J4/1430/09 dt: 8-6- 2009 to hand over the property of the petitioner as illegal, irregular, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and violative of provisions of Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987, Rules framed there under and offends Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not interfere in any manner with the possession and enjoyment of petitioner property site admeasuring Ac.0-90 cts, covered by patta no.43, Sy.No.87 situated in Vepagunta Village, Vepagunta Panchayat, Visakhapatnam District and to pass such other suitable orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.T.M.K.CHAITANYA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following : ORDER: 1. This Court issued rule nisi on1-7-2009 and in W.P.M.P.No.16707/2009 made the following order: “There shall be interim direction to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the land in an extent of Ac.0.90 cents covered by patta No.43, Sy.No.87, situated in Vepagunta village, Vepagunta Panchayat, Visakhapatnam District, until further orders”. 2. The 3rd respondent filed W.V.M.P.No.2214/2009 to vacate the said interim order. 3. At this stage, the Counsel on record, the learned Counsel representing the writ petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Endowments representing the respondents 1 and 2 and Sri Venugopal Rao, the learned Counsel representing the 3rd respondent in the Writ Petition, made a request for final disposal of the Writ Petition and hence the Writ Petition itself is being disposed of finally. 4. The Writ Petition is filed for a writ of mandamus declaring the impugned action of the 3rd respondent in issuing Rc.No.J/1430/09, dt.8-6-2009 to handover the property of the petitioner as illegal, irregular, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and violative of provisions of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 and the Rules framed thereunder and offending Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently to set-aside the eviction notice Rc.No.J/1430/09 dt.8-6-2009 of the 3rd respondent in respect of the petitioner’s site admeasuring Acs.0.90 cents covered by Patta No.43, Sy.N.87, situated in Vepagunta village, Vepagunta Panchayat, Visakhapatnam District and to pass such other suitable orders. 5. The facts in detail had been narrated in paras 2 to 10 of the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition. Equally a counter affidavit in detail had been filed. In para-9 of the counter affidavit it is stated that generally issuance of notices are mandatory to the concerned parties before initiating any legal action against the encroachers under due process of law and in fact the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, Visakhapatnam is having jurisdiction to enquire such type of cases either suo motu or upon a complaint made by the competent authority i.e., 3rd respondent-Devasthanam. It is further stated that in case the Assistant Commissioner concerned failed to recognize such type of encroachment on suo motu basis, the concerned Department has to make a written complaint to the Assistant Commissioner for conducting enquiry regarding the encroachment of temple land and in the course of initiating action for eviction the 3rd respondent- Devasthanam had issued a notice to the petitioner to handover the said property of the subject temple. It is further stated that if the petitioner is aggrieved by the said action of the Devasthanam, there is ample opportunity to the petitioner and he may give reply notice to the respondent- Devasthanam, but he did not avail the opportunity. The issue of notice is formal course of action before initiating legal action against the encroacher like petitioner and therefore the petitioner cannot say that the respondent- Devasthanam has no sanction of law to issue the eviction notice to the petitioner. 6. In the light of the clear stand taken in the counter affidavit of the 3rd respondent, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Writ Petition be disposed of giving opportunity to the writ petitioner to raise all the objections to the notice under challenge and let the 3rd respondent consider such objections which may be raised by the writ petitioner and decide the matter in accordance with law. 7. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of with the above directions. No costs. _________________ Justice P.S. Narayana Date : 7-8-2009 AM