LAWS(APH)-2004-12-95

MEKA SURYANARAYANA Vs. REGIONAL COMMR

Decided On December 21, 2004
MEKA SURYANARAYANA Appellant
V/S
REGIONAL JOINT COMMISSIONER ENDOWMENTS, ENDOWMENTS DEPT., KAKINADA, E.G. DIST. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the cultivating tenant of Ac. 13.35 cents of land, belonging to Sri Nagareswara Swamy Temple, Jegurupadu Village, Kadiam Mandal, East-Godavari District. The lease is said to have been granted to the petitioner in the year 1970. The petitioner was issued a notice dated 23-4-2003, intimating that the lease stood terminated, by virtue of the provisions of Section 82 of the A.P. Chairtable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987, as amended by Act 27 of 2002, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Endowments Act'). Thereupon, the petitioner filed an application before the 2nd respondent to declare and recognize him as landless poor. Through his order dated 26-11-2004, the 2nd respondent rejected the claim of the petitioner. The Executive Officer of the temple, the 3rd respondent, issued a notification, dated 22-11-2004, proposing to auction the leasehold rights of the land. The petitioner challenges the same.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri G. Krishna Murthy, submits that the petitioner holds only an extent of 30 cents of land in Sy.No.6/2, as owner, and as such, he was entitled to be declared as a landless poor person. Placing reliance upon a Circular, dated 4-6-2004, issued by the office of the Commissioner of Endowments, he submits that the petitioner ought to have been continued as lessee.

(3.) Learned Government Pleader for Endowments and learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent, on the other hand, submit that the land held by an individual, as a lessee, or owner, it is required to be taken into account in deciding his status as landless poor, and in that view of the matter, the petitioner cannot be treated as landless poor. They also contend that the lease in favour of the petitioner stood terminated by virtue of Section 82 of the Endowments Act, and he has no right to continue in the possession of the land.