CHINTA RAMAIAH Vs. GOVT OF A P REP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This common order shall dispose of the two writ petitions as they are filed by the same petitioners with reference to the same cause of action. The writ petitions raise an important question as to interpretation of Section 80 of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 ('the Act' for brevity) in relation to the power of the Commissioner to accept or refuse sanction for effecting gift, sale, exchange and mortgage of any immovable property of a charitable or religious institution or endowment.

(2.) The facts leading to filing of the two cases in brief are as follows. The third respondent is a registered religious institution which owns an extent of Acs. 33,00 in Valivarthipadu village in Gudivada Mandal, Krishna District, comprised in Sy.Nos. 175/1 and 176/2. The institution issued an auction notice proposing to sell Acs. 12.32 cents by tender-cum-auction on 6-10-1985. The auction sale to be conducted is subject to confirmation by the Commissioner of Endowments, the second respondent herein. Be that as it is, the petitioners have deposited an amount of Rs.5,000/- and participated in the auction on 6-10-1999 at the office of the Commissioner. The property admeasuring Acs. 12.32 cents was divided into three plots. In relation to Plot No.VII admeasuring an extent of Acs. 2.88 cents in Sy.No. 176/2, the first petitioner became highest bidder by offering Rs.1,20,000/- per acre. In respect of Plot No.VIII admeasuring Acs.5.59 cents in Sy.No. 175/1A, the second petitioner became highest bidder offering an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- per acre. As required under the rules, the petitioners deposited 1/3rd of bid amount and obtained receipts. The petitioners did not receive any confirmation or any advice to pay the balance amount.

(3.) In the meanwhile, having seen two news items on 31-10-1995 and 29-11-1995 to the effect that an extent of Acs.33.00 or Acs.35.00 belonging to the third respondent is being handed over to the Revenue Department for the purpose of provision of house-sites to weaker sections, the petitioners filed W.P.No.27286 of 1995 praying for a declaration that the action of the Executive Officer of the third respondent in handing over possession of the land in an extent of Acs.8.87 cents in Sy.Nos.175/1 and 176/2 (for which the petitioners had bid) as illegal and arbitrary and for a consequential direction to respondent No.5 to hand over possession of the land to the third respondent. A counter-affidavit was filed in the writ petition inter alia stating that the Commissioner of Endowments refused to confirm the sale of land belonging to the third respondent by his proceedings dated 22-11-1995. Challenging the same, the petitioners filed another writ petition being W.P.No. 7014 of 1997 praying for a Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings of the second respondent dated 22-11-1995 as arbitrary and illegal.