(1.) This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:
(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the 1st petitioner had purchased an extent of Ac.0.06 cents in Sy. No 550 of Tadipatri village, with specific boundaries, from the 2ndpetitioner and his two brothers by names Chinna venkataramana and Venkata sivudu, under a registered sale deed dated No.3405/1995 dtd. 16/12/1995. Now the 2nd petitioner along with another person want to purchase back the same. When the petitionerswent to the 4th respondent's office for ascertaining the present market value and the stamp duty to be paid for registering the same he informed the petitioners that he cannot process the document for registration in respect of above mentioned property as the same is included by the 2nd respondent in the list furnished by him under Sec.22-A (1)(c) of the Registration Act, the under the impugned proceedings.
(3.) The 2nd respondent has filed counter affidavit denying all the allegations made in the petition. In the counter affidavit, it is stated that, it is a case where the petitioners and the Mutt are claiming rights over the subject landed property of this case and hence, the remedy available to the petitioners is to approach A.P. Endowments Tribunal by invoke Sec.87 of the Act, 30/87 but not by filing present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, since question of fact and law is involved, which can be decided only through regular enquiry, but not by summary procedure. It is well settled law that a writ petition is not maintainable, when an alternative and efficacious remedy is available under the Statute. In Endowments Act, a Tribunal is constituted U/Sec.162 of the Act for the determination of any dispute, question or the matter relating to a Charitable Institution, Dharmadayam, Religious Charity, Religious Endowments, Religious Institution or any Institution as defined in the Act. Therefore, this writ petition is not maintainable.