YERRAM SATYANARAYANA Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER ENDOWMENTS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The counsel for the parties agreed that the writ petition itself may be disposed of and I have heard them at length.

(2.) The writ petition is filed by three petitioners for directing the respondents not to evict the petitioners from shops bearingNos. 7-5-26,7-5-25 and 7-5-24 respectively pursuant to the eviction proceedings initiated by respondents 1 and 2 i.e., the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Ramkote, Hyderabad and the Assistant Commissioner, Endowment, Rangareddy Division. Admittedly the shops in question belong to Sri Hanuman temple, Seetharampet, Tandur. The third respondent herein was the Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the said temple and his term of office expired in the year 1987, but thereafter he has been continuing as a defacto trustee. It is the case of the petitioners that the third respondent has let out the three Mulgis in question to the petitioners on 18-1 -1995 on a monthly rent of Rs. 400/- each. In April, 1995, respondents soughtto evict the petitioners from the shops in their possession without issuing any notice to them and without following the procedure laid down in Section 83of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable & Hindu Religious Institutions & Endowments Act, 1987, (for short'the Act'). The petitioners have there upon filed the present writ petition. By an order dated 26-4-1995 passed in W.P.M.P.No. 10721 of 1995 this court granted interim stay of the eviction of the petitioners. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2, it is stated inter alia that the alleged lease of the shops to the petitioners by Respondent No. 3 is neither true nor valid, that the third respondent, in fact, addressed letters till 28-3 -1995 to respondents 1 and 2 seeking permission to lease out the shops, that on 17-4-1995 the Commissioner of Endowments directed the Executive Officer of Bhadreswaraswamy temple, Tandur, to take charge of the shops in question and seal them and accordingly on 28-4-1995 the Executive Officer took charge of the same, that all leases of immovable properties pertaining to charitable and Hindu religious institutions and endowments shall be made by public auction only according to the A. P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Immoveable Properties (other than Agricultural Lands) Lease Rules, 1982 and that any lease granted otherwise than in accordance with the said rules is null and void.

(3.) Respondents 4 to 6, who got themselves impleaded as parties to the writ petition, contend that they and their predecessors-in-interest have been in occupation of the shops in question as tenants from 1965 onwards, that in 1993 at the request of the third respondent, they temporarily vacated the shops for purposes of renovation on the undertaking given by the third respondent promising to restore their tenancy after the renovation work is completed, that contrary to the said undertaking, when the third respondent sought to induct others into possession, respondents 4 to 6 tried to take possession of the shops and at that stage on the intervention of the Assistant Commissioner of Endowments they re-delivered possession of the shops to the third respondent in the presence of the Assistant Commissioner on 5-1-1995 on the assurance given by them that their cases will be considered and the shops, after competition, will beleased outto them on reasonable rent. It appears that earlier respondents 4 to 6 filed suits in the District Munsifs Court, Tandur against the temple committee and the official respondents for apermanentinjunctionrestraining the defendants from evicting respondents 4 to 6 from the shops, but in view of the subsequent understanding reached on 5-1 -1995, it i s admitted, the said suits have become infructuous though they are still pending.