B. SUBRAHMANYAM Vs. YADALLA NAGAMMA CHARITIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these writ petitions are related to one Endowment Institution and the facts and reliefs sought are similar. They are all being disposed of by way of this common order. W.P.Nos.17006 and 7111 of 2016:

(2.) The facts relating to these two writ petitions are as follows:-

(3.) Thereafter, the Commissioner, Endowments by the proceedings, dtd. 15/5/2013, in Memo in Rc.No.B5/51240/2012 extended the lease upto 31/12/2015. The petitioner, in the month of November, 2015, submitted an application to the Commissioner, Endowments for renewal of the lease upto 31/12/2019. While this representation was pending, the Executive Officer of the Endowment Institution issued a notice, dtd. 12/2/2016, informing the petitioner that the lease granted to the petitioner had expired and called upon the petitioner to handover the possession of the shop. In reply to this notice, the petitioner requested the Executive Officer to consider the renewal of the lease. Thereupon, the Executive Officer had given a reply to the petitioner stating that the building had become old and dilapidated and needed to be demolished. Thereupon, W.P.No.7111 of 2016 is filed seeking the impugned quite notice, dtd. 12/2/2016 issued by the Executive Officer of the Endowments to be set aside and to give a further direction to the respondents therein to continue the petitioner in the said shop.