IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.20318 of 2008 Between: Sri Kasi Visweswara Swamy Temple, Thumadu Village, Jarugumalli Mandal, Prakasam District, Rep by its Executive Officer. ...PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 A.P. Scheduled Caste Cooperative, Finance Corporation Rep by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director Masab Tank, Hyderabad. 3 The Collector/Chairman, Prakasam District, Scheduled Castes Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Ongole, Prakasam District. 4 The Executive Director, Prakasam District, Scheduled Castes Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Ongole, Prakasam 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 a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ or order or orders or direction under Article 226 of Constitution of India to sell the Ac. 28.00 cents in Land in R.S. No. 63/1 situated in Thumadu Village, Jarugumalli Mandal, Prakasam District at Rs. 2,75,000/- per acre to the Andhr Pradesh Schedule caste Cooperative Finance Corporation, Hyderabad. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.T.M.PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents: MR.M.GANGA RAO The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.20318 of 2008 ORDER: This Writ Petition is ﬁled with a prayer to permit the petitioner to sell Acs.28.00 of land belonging to Sri Kasi Visweswara Swamy Temple in R.S.No.63/1 of Thumadu Village, Jarugumalli Mandal, Prakasam District at the rate of Rs.2,75,000/- (Rupees two lakh seventy ﬁve thousand only) per acre in favour of the A.P. Scheduled Caste Cooperative Finance Corporation, Hyderabad-the second respondent herein. It is stated that the Sub Registrar had certiﬁed the value of the land at Rs.45,000/- (Rupees forty ﬁve thousand only) per acre whereas the Assistant Commissioner accorded permission by stipulating the rate of Rs.2,75,000/- (Rupees two lakh seventy five thousand only) per acre. Heard Sri V.T.M.Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner. The aﬃdavit in support of the Writ Petition is ﬁled by the Executive Oﬃcer of the Temple. It is not stated as to whether the Trust Board of the Temple had passed any resolution proposing to sell the land. It is not known whether there are any Hereditary Trustees for the Temple. The aﬃdavit is also silent as to the income derived from the Temple or the circumstances that warranted the proposal for sale of the land. It is not out of place to mention that two public spirited citizens ﬁled W.P.No.11812 of 2005 in this Court complaining that the valuable properties of the Religious Institutions are being sold indiscriminately. The Writ Petition was admitted and interim direction was issued to the eﬀect that no lands belonging to the Temple shall be sold except with the specific permission of this Court. Sale of the lands belonging to the Temple cannot be resorted to a matter of course. The object with which the public spirited citizens have endowed the land is that immovable properties would be source of income for maintenance and development of Temples etc. Act 30/87 and the Rules there under warrant that the leasehold rights belonging to the Temples must be put to auction once in every three years and the income so derived must be utilized for the maintenance and development of the Temples. Such a step, unfortunately, does not appear to have been taken. Even otherwise, the proposal put forward by the petitioner itself is some what vague and uncertain. It is not even mentioned that the second respondent had accorded its consent for purchasing the land at the rate of Rs.2,75,000/- (Rupees two lakh seventy ﬁve thousand only) per acre. Assuming that such price is being oﬀered, the petitioner ought to have taken all the steps to put the valuable property to proper use, instead of alienating it once for all. Past experience shows that the consideration derived from sale of properties of Temples is appropriated for by the Government in one form or the other or it is not made available for the activities of the Institution. Either way, it is not advisable to sell the property. The Writ Petition is disposed of directing that the petitioner and the Assistant Commissioner shall take immediate steps to put the leasehold rights of the land in question, to auction and utilize the income for the development of the Temple. If the petitioner still feels that sale of the land is necessary, it shall be open to them to come forward with proposal one year after the leasehold rights of the land are put to auction and income out of it is derived, backed by the resolution of the Trust Board. _____________________ (L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J) 22nd September 2008 RRB