SATYA PRAMODA TEERTHA SWAMULUVARU Vs. COMMISSIONER OF HINDU RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS ANDHRA PRADESH HYDERABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As the point involved in these cases is common, they are disposed of by a common judgment.

(2.) It is sufficient to state the facts in Writ Appeal No. 599 of 1969: The application filed by the Writ Petitioner Sri Satya Pramoda Teertha Swamulavaru, Head of the Uttaradi Mtt under Section 57 (a) of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act (XIX of 1951) for declaration that Uttaradi Mutt was not a public institution within the meaning of the Act and hence, it was not amenable to the jurisdiction of the Endowments Department, was dismissed by the Deputy Commissioner on December 16, 1965. The appeal preferred against the decision of the Deputy Commissioner, under Section 61 (1) of that At to the Commissioner for Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments on February 23, 1966 was pending before him on the date of the coming into force of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act (XVII of 1966) i.e. on 26-1-1967. The appeal was rejected by the Commissioner on July 19, 1967 on the ground that he had on jurisdiction to dispose of the same after the passing of the present Act. The Writ Petition No. 3291/67 questioning the validity of the aforesaid order of the Commissioner was dismissed by Chinnappa Reddy, J. on the ground that the right of appeal possessed by the petitioner under the earlier Act perished, with the repeal of that Act. Aggrieved by that decision, this Writ Appeal has been filed by the appellant.

(3.) Mr. T. S. Narasinga Rao and Mr. T. Laxmaiah, learned counsel for the Writ Petitioners, contend that the right of appeal accrued to their clients on the date of the coming into force of the present Act is saved by Sub-sec. (3) to Section 109 of the repealing Act read with Section 8 (d) and (f) of the Andhra Pradesh General Clauses Act, 1891. This claim of the petitioners is opposed by the learned Government Pleader contending inter alia that the right of appeal possessed by the petitioners under the repealed Act has been taken away by the repealing Act and in any even, Section 8 of the Andhra Pradesh General Clauses Act is not attracted; there is not forum available under the present Act to entertain the appeals filed under Section 61 (1) of the repealed Act.