Smt. Kudupudi Geetha Ganga, vs The Assistant Commissioner,
2021 Latest Caselaw 2156 AP

               HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI
                               AND
               HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURESH REDDY

                        Writ Appeal No.338 of 2021

                       (Taken up through video conferencing)


JUDGMENT:       (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Joymalya Bagchi)



         We have heard Sri A.Satya Prasad, learned senior counsel

appearing for the appellant/writ petitioner.


         It is contended that the issue with regard to eviction is pending

consideration before this Court in W.P.Nos.4884 of 2018 and 5319 of

2016.     Under such circumstances, it is submitted that imposition of

damage charges by the learned Single Judge amounts to prejudging the

issue.


         This submission is opposed by the learned Government Pleader for

Endowments. She submits the Executive Officer of the 2nd respondent

instituted eviction proceedings in exercise of statutory powers under

Section 83 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious

Institutions & Endowments Act, 1987 and there is no injunction order

passed by this Court in the aforesaid writ proceedings restraining the

officer from resorting to such exercise. The order of the Tribunal is a

well-reasoned one and the learned Single Judge restricted the payment

of damages prospectively subject to the final decision in the appeal.

Having heard the rival submissions, we may note at the outset

that the order under challenge is an interlocutory one where rights of

the parties had not been finally decided. It is well settled in an intra-

Court appeal the Bench would be loath to interfere with a discretionary

interlocutory order until and unless the same is perverse or contrary to

law.

Learned senior counsel would strenuously persuade us that the

order under challenge pre-judges the issue involved in the appeal itself.

We are unable to accept such submission as the Tribunal did not lack

jurisdiction to entertain the eviction proceedings pending the aforesaid

writ proceedings as no order of injunction was passed in the aforesaid

writ proceedings against exercise of statutory power by the Executive

Officer seeking eviction of the appellants. Whether the order of eviction

is lawful or not is a matter to be decided in the course of appeal.

However, direction to pay damages and that too prospectively cannot be

said to be illegal or perverse inasmuch as it is undisputed that the land

in question is an endowment land and nothing has been placed on record

to trace the title in favour of the appellant.

At this stage, learned senior counsel prays that his client may be

permitted to make proportionate payment of the damages imposed on

her. In view of the meager quantity fixed by the Tribunal, in our

considered opinion, such submission does not find favour with us.

In the light of the above discussion, the Writ Appeal is disposed

of. We hasten to add any observations made by us in this judgment are

for the purpose of disposal of this appeal and shall not affect the writ

proceedings which shall be decided independently and in accordance

with law.

The Writ Appeal is accordingly disposed of.

There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ appeal shall

stand closed.

_________________ JOYMALYA BAGCHI, J

________________ K. SURESH REDDY, J

25.06.2021 RAR

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURESH REDDY

Writ Appeal No.338 of 2021 (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Joymalya Bagchi)

25-06-2021

RAR