Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

G.N.Nagaraju vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 15 December, 2022

                                 1
                                               W.P. No.13062 of 2022
                                                             BKM, J



     * HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN

               + WRIT PETITION No.13062 of 2022

% 15.12.2022

# G.N.Nagaraju
                                                      ... Petitioner

                              Vs.
$ The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, and
another
                                                   ... Respondents

! Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI RAGHAVAN K THALAPAKA

Counsel for the Respondents:
      M/s. C.Sindhu Kumari, SC for TTD for respondent No.2.
<Gist :

>Head Note:

? Cases referred:
   1. LPA No.77 of 1997
   2. W.P.No.41 of 1993
   3.
                                  2
                                               W.P. No.13062 of 2022
                                                             BKM, J


HIGH COUIRT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATHI.

              WRIT PETITION No.13062 of 2022

Between:
G.N.Nagaraju
                                                      ... Petitioner

                               Vs.

$ The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, and
another
                                           .... Respondents



Date of Judgment Pronounced: 15.12.2022

Submitted for Approval:


     HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN

   1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers          Yes/No
      may be allowed to see the judgments ?
   2. Whether the copies of judgment may be         Yes/No
      marked to Law Reporters/Journals
   3. Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship wish to          Yes/No
      see the fair copy of the Judgment ?


                           _________________________________
                            JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN
                                     3
                                                    W.P. No.13062 of 2022
                                                                  BKM, J


        HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN

               WRIT PETITION No.13062 OF 2022

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondent

No.2 in not considering the petitioner's representation dated 08.12.2021

in respect of the petitioner's land popularly known as Mathrusri

Tarigonda Vengamamba Brundavanam admeasuring in an extent of

Ac.0-12½ cents in Survey No.641 situated at Tirumala Village,

Tirupati, Chittoor District for construction of Matrusri Tarigonda

Vengamamba Nilayam and Dhyana Mandiram by the petitioner.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

senior counsel Mr.S.Satyanarayana Prasad for the respondent No.2.

3. The petitioner's representation to the respondent No.2 dated

08.12.2021 is as follows:

"1) During the lifetime of Tarigonda Vengamamaba between 1730 to 1817, with the blessings of Swamy, she wrote some sankeertanas more than around 600 and attained Kaivalyam.

W.P. No.13062 of 2022 BKM, J

2) From that time to till the present generation, our heirs are performing Tarigonda Vengamamba Mutyala harati Kainkaryam in Ekantaseva in SRivari temple.

3) My father Late G.Subramanyam has two sons. Myself is the eldest by name G.S.Nagaraju. The second son Mr.Viswa Murthy is performing Tarigonda Mutyala Harathi Kainkaryam in Ekantaseva in Srivari temple. Tirumala.

4) In Tirumala at Tarigonda Vengamamba Brundavanam (Samadhi) our family descendants evne today performing daily morning and evening litting of the lamp (deeparadhanam), pooja and daily pooja Kainkaryams.

5) After Vengamamba Amma went into Brundavanam (samadhi) our ancestors had been protecting the surrounding place/site by performing nityapooja and protecting the same.

6) As per the judgment in O.S.No.211 of 1982 on the file of Additional Subordinate Judge, Tirupati, Chittoor district dated 06.10.1989 obtained by my late father G.Subrahmanyam and as per the orders of RDO, Chandragiri, the Tirumala Vengamamba Brundavan in Survey No.642 in an extent of Ac.0-58 cents belongs to Tarigonda Vengamamba. In it as per Survey No.641 Ac.0-12 ½ cents along with Tarigonda Vengamamba Brundavanam, the surrounding site belongs to Vengamamba family members. As per Survey No.592, 643, Ac.0-45 ½ cents was taken over by the TTD from Kuppaiah Sarma for which they said the compensation would be paid to our family members/descendants. But TTD has not so far paid.

W.P. No.13062 of 2022 BKM, J

7) Hence the above said officer may consider our request by examining in detail and an appropriate decision may be taken if Tarigonda Vengamamab Brundavanam, the surrounding place/site if it is allotted, we build Tarigonda NIlayam there and still more develop the Brundavanam.

And

8) We wilfully desire that the TTD gives the permissions to have Dhyana Mandiram and for the coming devotees to cater annadana Prasadam (free food) distribution in Tarigonda Vengamamab Nilayam and for construction of Tarigonda Nilayam in the surrounding places of Brundavanam. We hope and wish that justice would be done to us by following the judgment of the court and the order of the RDO.

Sd/- G.S.Nagaraja (Heirs of Mathrusri Tarigonda Vengamamba) Tirupati Phone No.9177525712 Address:

Flat No.201, Lakshmi Balaji NIvas, Viswanath Nagar, Near Bonthalamma Temple, Karakambadi Road, Tirupati - 517 507

Copy to

1. ...

2. ...

3. ...

4. ...

Enclosures:

1. ...

2. ...

3. ...

4. ...

5. ...

W.P. No.13062 of 2022 BKM, J

4. The petitioner along with his brother being the plaintiffs initiated

action against the respondent No.2 as defendant in O.S.No.317 of 2014

on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Tirupati, to declare that the

plaintiffs are the legal heirs and the legal representatives of the deceased

G.Subrahmanyam and they are entitled to perform Mutyala Harati to

Lord Venkateswara at the time of ekanthaseva in Sivari temple,

Tirumala and for awarding costs. The said suit was decreed partly only

to the extent of declaring the plaintiffs as the legal heirs of the decreased

G.Subramanyam vide it's judgment dated 26.08.2016. For the other

reliefs, it was dismissed.

5. In LPA No.77 of 1997 before the Division Bench of the erstwhile

High Court of Andhra Pradesh, dated 27.07.2011, arising between

G.SUBRAHMAYAM (DIED) PER LRS VS. G.LEELA AND OTHERS,

it was held that the judgment and decree of the trial court is confirmed

modifying the decree directing the defendant No.1 to pay the amount

she received from the respondent No.4 to the extent of Ac.0-45 ½ cents

being the backyard portion of item No.3(house) acquired by the fourth

defendant. This shall be in addition to the decree for delivering

possession of item 3 which remains after acquisition. Similarly in the

W.P. No.13062 of 2022 BKM, J

matter of G.Subrahmanyam (died) (per LRs) and the LAO and Special

Deputy Collector (LA), Tirupati, and others in W.P.No.41 of 1993

dated 08.06.2007 of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh it was

held as follows:

"Therefore, I consider it appropriate to direct the first respondent - Land Acquisition Officer to consider as to the quantum of compensation which the original writ petitioner and his branch of successors are entitled to receive and to that extent, compensation is liable to be paid to them. This issue has not been examined so far by the Land Acquisition Officer. Therefore, the same has got to be determined by him within a period of three months from today. Depending upon such determination, the right to receive such compensation either may accrue or may not arise. Therefore, if the Land Acquisition Officer finds that the original Writ Petitioner and his successors are divested off the Mirasidar Service together with the property in question and consequently, the same is liable to be compensated, it is only appropriate that such compensation should be paid within a further period of one month from the date, the determination is made. If in the meantime, the Supreme Court decides the matter or in any manner if any further decree is liable to be drawn up in favour of the original plaintiff in O.S.No.211 of 1982, the same will also be appropriately given effect to by the Land Acquisition Officer. With this, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs."

6. In the subject matter of Land Acquisition by the Tirumala

Tirupati Devasthanams with respect to the site and structures

W.P. No.13062 of 2022 BKM, J

measuring an extent of 3251 square feet in Tirumala, an award was

passed in award No.8/89-90 dated 30.11.1989 and in the matter of

payment of compensation of Rs.2,15,906/- to the awardee Smt.G.Leela

who filed W.P.No.41 of 1993 dated 08.06.2007 and payment of

compensation as per the orders in O.S.No.211 of 1982 the Special

Deputy Collector, Tirupati vide proceedings in ROC No.B/49/2007

dated 07.09.2007 it was held as follows:

"The writ petitioners neither attended for enquiry nor filed any documentary evidence before the Land Acquisition Officer, to finalize the matter as directed by the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. within stipulated time i.e. three months from the date of judgment on 08-06-2007. Notices dt.18-08- 2006 were issued to the writ petitioners and to the 3rd respondent to attend this office on 25-08-2007 on the mentioned address in the orders of the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. i.e. T.S.No. 26/1, Ward No.3, Block E, North Mada Street of Tirumala, through personnel service for the purpose of enquiry and to produce documentary evidence to proceed as per the orders of the Hon'ble High Court. The notices issued have not been served on the writ petitioners and the respondent no.3, as they are not residing in the noted property in the orders of Hon'ble High Court and substitute service was also made by affixing the notices on property covered under acquisition.

In the circumstances as stated supra the Land Acquisition Officer, unable to implement the orders of the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. vide reference 2nd read above due to the non-cooperation of the writ petitioners."

W.P. No.13062 of 2022 BKM, J

7. In the matter of Land Acquisition by the Tirumala Tirupati

Devastanams in the site and structures in T.S.No.7-3-L of Tirumala for

the purpose of Construction of Pilgrim Amenities complex with

Sudarsan counters, Mini bus, stand and widening of roads an award

was passed by the Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition,

Tirumala Tirupati Devastanams, Tirupati, dated 07.12.2005 awarding

compensation to the awardees by name G.S.Nagaraju,

S/o.G.Subrahmanyam and Sri G.S.Vishnu Murthy,

S/o.G.Subrahmanyam total compensation of Rs.48,412.69 ps.

8. The petitioner's father late G.Subrahmanyam during his lifetime

initiated action in O.S.No.211 of 1982 on the file of Additional

Subordinate Judge, Tirupati against G.Leela, Pradeep Nanda Kishore,

R.Chandrasekharan and the Tirumala Tirupati Devastanams, Tirupati,

as defendants for declaration of plaintiffs' right to perform Tarigonda

Vengamamba Mirasi Services in Srivari temple at Tirumala for

permanent injunction, for recovery of possession of the plaint schedule

properties and for costs. The matter was contested by the defendants 1

to 3 therein. Insofar as the defendant No.4/TTD is concerned, it filed a

written statement contending that under the Act 30 of 1987 all the

W.P. No.13062 of 2022 BKM, J

Mirasi Services stand abolished and hence neither the plaintiffs nor the

defendant Nos.1 to 3 can claim any rights whatsoever and regarding the

rival claims of the parties, the TTD is in no way concerned. It is a

matter to be decided in the court of law and in the usual course first

defendant therein was recognized for rendering services and defendant

No.1 was paid compensation after satisfying the amount of claim.

Upon consideration of the matter on merits, the said court rendered its

judgment on 06.10.1989 declaring that the plaintiff therein is entitled to

perform the services and also to the properties under the terms of Ex.B1

Will consequent upon the death of Defendant No.1's husband

G.V.L.N.Murty without male issues. The plaintiff is held entitled to

recover the portions of the suit properties which are in possession of the

defendant No.1. Thus the suit was decreed with costs.

9. The appeals and cross objections preferred in A.S.No.2582 of

1989 against the judgment and decree in O.S.No.211 of 1982 on the file

of Additional Subordinate Judge, Tirupati dated 06.10.1989 were

dismissed by the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh vide its

judgment dated 17.04.1995. In Application No.18242/61 in the court of

the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chandragiri between Tirumala Tirupati

W.P. No.13062 of 2022 BKM, J

Devastanams, Tirupati and Kuppaiah Sarma being the petitioner and

the respondent respectively, a compromise petition was filed on behalf

of the parties said to have been signed on 22.03.1962 as under:

1) The Respondent having failed to perform the services as per the terms of the original grant and as the lands in question are Devadayam for the benefit of Sri Venkateshwara Swamy at Tirumala, he is hereby surrendering the land of an extent of 0.59 cents bearing survey number 642 (Six hundred and Forty Two) of Tirupati Village to the petitioner who shall enjoy the same.

2) It is hereby agreed between the parties that since the portion marked A B C D in the sketch herewith filed which may be read as part and parcel of this compromise contains the tomb of "Tharigonda Vengamamba", the Respondent shall be in possession and management of the said plot A B C D of an extent of 0.12 ½ cents (Twelve and half cents).

3) From today the Respondent has no right, title or interest in the lands marked E A D F and C B G H in the sketch herewith filed.

4) The Respondent shall pay the assessment if any over the plot A B C D to the government or any local authority.

10. In the next page to the compromise application it was written as

compromise read over and both parties admit the terms. Under it,

the name of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chandragiri was there.

The next page contains the sketch of an extent of Ac.0-59 cents. It

appears that the Ssurvey No.642 is surrounded by Survey Nos.641, 592

and 643. The 'EAFD' portion contains Ac.0-14½ cents, 'ABCD'

marked portion contains Ac.0-12½ cents, 'BGCH' contains Ac.0-13½

W.P. No.13062 of 2022 BKM, J

cents. Total it comes to Ac.0-59 cents. Even as per the said

compromise, the total extent of Ac.0-59 cents in S.No.642 was

surrendered to the TTD.

11. On the other hand, the case of the respondent No.2 is that in the

year 1874 the then British Government ruling the Indian territory had

assigned an extent of Ac.10-1 square miles of land around the temple of

Lord Sri Venkateswara Swamy in Tirumala. Subsequently, the then

Government of Madras through DDS No.2719 dated 12.12.1923

assigned the said land to Lord Sri Venkateswara Swamy. This was

followed by G.O.Ms.No.4429 dated 23.09.1940 by the then Madras

Government. The Government of Andhra Pradesh in G.O.Ms.No.1784

dated 04.11.1965 confirmed the title of Lord

Sri Venkateswara Swamy in respect of Ac.10 1/3 sq.miles area of land

near and around the temple of Lord Sri Venakteswara Swamy temple.

As per Rule 196 issued in .GO.Ms.No.311 dated 09.04.1990, the said

Ac.10 1/3 sq.miles area near and around the temple of Lord Sri

Venkateswara Swamy at Tirumala hills was declared to be the exclusive

property of Tirumala Tirupati Devastanams. In Tirumala there is no

land belonging to any private individuals. The petitioner has no right

W.P. No.13062 of 2022 BKM, J

for consideration of such representation dated 18.12.2021. In the said

representation, the petitioner refers to Ac.0-58 cents in Survey No.642

and it belongs to his father Late Sri G.Subramanyam. He claims that

Ac.0-58 cents belongs to Tarigonda Vengamamba. However, he states

that in Survey No.641 in an extent of Ac.0-12½ cents, there is a tomb of

Tarigonda Vengamamba and the land near and around was taken from

Kuppaiah Sarma. He further stated that the compensation was agreed

to be paid to the family of the petitioner and the Tirumala Tirupati

Devastanam did not pay the said compensation. Ultimately, the

petitioner requested the TTD that the land near and around the tomb of

Tarigonda Vengamamba may be allotted to him so that he will develop

it by constructing a Dhyana Mandiram and arrange free distribution of

food and Kainkaryams to the devotees of the tomb as well as to the

persons near and around the areas. It is the further case of the

respondent No.2 that the tomb of Matrusri Tarigonda Vengamamba

Brindavanam is in Survey No.642 but not in Survey No.641 of

Tirumala Village. The whole of the land in Survey No.642 of Tirumala

belongs to Tirumala Tirupati Devastanams. Neither the petitioner nor

anyone has any right over the said land. The 2nd respondent intended to

W.P. No.13062 of 2022 BKM, J

develop the land near and around the Brindavanam of Matrusri

Tarigonda Vengamamba for the benefit of the devotees. Earlier the

whole of this land was in possession of one school as a tenant.

The 2nd respondent gave the same to the said school namely S.V.B.N.R.

English Medium school. There was prolonged litigation with the said

tenant. Ultimately there was a compromise and the tenant vacated the

premises and the entire land in S.No.642 including the Tarigonda

Vengamamba Brindavanam was taken over and it is in the possession

of the TTD. The said school building was also demolished and the

entire land has been made clear for further development. The TTD

intends to develop the whole land for the benefit of pilgrims without

disturbing the tomb. The petitioner has no right in whatsoever manner

either on this land or on the said Brindavanam. Matru Sri Tadigonda

Vengamamba is a popular and ardent devotee of Lord Sri Venkateswara

Swamy. The petitioner does not claim to be the lineal descendant of the

family of Tarigonda Vengamamba. The TTD from ages has been

recognising and worshipping the wishes of Mastrusri Tarigonda

Vengamamba. In this regard the ceremonies and rituals are being

performed to Lord Sri Venkateswara Swamy in the name of Matrusri

W.P. No.13062 of 2022 BKM, J

Tarigonda Vengamamba. In this writ petition, the petitioner cannot

claim for recognition to be the hailing family member of Matrustri

Tarigonda Vengamamba. He raised disputed questions of facts and law

in this writ petition to claim the land covered by the Brundavanam or

the surrounding areas of the said Brindavanam. The disputes referred

by the petitioner were between the petitioner's father and the proxies

resulted in the suit and appeal thereon have no relevancy and bearing in

this writ petition. The entire extent of Ac.0-62 cents area in survey

No.642 has been always in the possession of the TTD either by itself or

through its tenant. The said total extent was handed over by it's tenant

to the TTD. The petitioner nor anyone claiming to be the descendants

of Matrusri Tarigonda Vengamamba were never in possession of the

said extent of either Ac.0-58 cents of the land or Ac.0-12½ cents of the

land in and around the Brindavanam of Matrusri Tarigonda

Vengamamba as alleged. The assertion that the petitioner's family

members are regularly performing pooja as predecessors of Matrusri

Tarigonda Vengamamba is not true and correct. Several devotees visit

Brundavanam and worship. But the said Brundavanam is under the

absolute control and management of the TTD only since the beginning.

W.P. No.13062 of 2022 BKM, J

The petitioner or anybody claiming to be his predecessors or successors

have no vested or exclusive right to worship the said Matrusri

Tarigonda Vengamamba Brundavanam. As part of the acquisition

proceedings a sum of Rs.96,00,826/- was awarded to all those who had

some structures or occupational rights in the land near and around the

Matrusri Tarigonda Vengamamba Brundavanam. That compensation

was paid. No compensation paid to the petitioner's proxy was collected

back. Pursuant to the order in W.P.No.41 of 1993 dated 08.06.2007, a

notice was issued by the Land Acquisition Officer.

All that has no relevancy for the relief sought by the petitioner in this

writ petition. Similarly the petitioner making a representation on

03.01.2013 to the TTD to give him an opportunity to perform Mutyala

Harathi seva has no relevancy for this case. The judgment and decree in

O.S.No.317 of 2014 is no way relevant to maintain this writ petition.

The petitioner is not entitled for any intimation in respect of the Boomi

Pooja performed in the said land. There is no necessity for any

acquisition and consent of the petitioner for developing this area by the

TTD as the petitioner has no right in the subject land. Almost all the

members of Tarigonda Vengamamba family participated for the

W.P. No.13062 of 2022 BKM, J

performance of Boomi Pooja along with other devotees but none of

them have any grievance. Thus, the petitioner's claim is vexatious and

speculative.

12. The material papers and the additional material papers filed

along with this writ petition are no way relevant for the purpose of this

writ petition specifically in the context of relief sought for in this writ

petition. The records and the field map available with the TTD show

that the entire extent in Survey No.642 belongs to the TTD and the said

land has been in possession of the TTD only. The petitioner is claiming

Acres 0.12 ½ cents in Survey No.641 but not in Survey No.642.

The petitioner cannot claim in this writ petition as descendant of one

Mr. Kuppaiah Sarma referred in the document filed by the petitioner

along with I.A. He did not explain as to how he is concerned or

connected with the said Mr.Kuppaiah Sarma. But the petitioner is no

way concerned either with the Matrusri Tarigonda Vengamamba

Brindavanam or with the surrounding land. Hence he is not entitled for

any such notice as claimed by the petitioner for the reasons stated

above.

W.P. No.13062 of 2022 BKM, J

13. In the light of the above said rival contentions, it has to be seen

for a moment before adverting to the real controversy involved in this

case, the brief history of "Mathrusri Tarigonda Vengamamba" as under:

"Matrusri Tarigonda Vengamamba who lived in the 18th century

was extremely devoted to Lord Sri Venkateswara. Hailing from Chitoor

District in Andhra Pradesh, this versatile saint-poetess composed

several Sankeerthanas and works in praise of Sri Laxmi Narasimha

Swami and Lord Venkateswara. Among her many literary

compositions, "Sri Venkatachala Mahatmeyem" is the most popular.

As she was a pioneer in Annaprasada Vitarana (free food distribution),

she is fondly remembered as Matrusri (Mother). Moved by her sincere

devotion and dedication, the Lord blessed her with a boon allowing her

to participate in the Ekantha Seva and take the final Harathi for Lord

Venkateshwara. This practice continues even today."

14. Then coming to the issue involved herein, the petitioner's

representation dated 08.12.2021 addressed to the 2nd respondent is to

consider the request of the petitioner for allotment of the Tarigonda

Vengamamba Brundavanam and the surrounding place/site to him to

build Tarigonda Nilayam, for starting Dhyana Mandiram and

W.P. No.13062 of 2022 BKM, J

Annadana Prasadam (free food distribution) for the devotees visiting

the Dhyana Mandiram. In the said representation he mentioned various

other things like Muthyala Harati Kainkarya Seva, the judgment in

O.S.No.211 of 1982 on the file of Additional Subordinate Judge,

Tirupati, dated 06.10.1989, the application filed before the RDO,

Chandragiri dated 22.03.1962, the judgment in O.S.No.317 of 2014 on

the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Tirupati, dated 26.08.2016, the

judgment of the erstwhile High Court in LPA No.77 of 1997 dated

27.07.2011, the order in W.P.No.41 of 1993 dated 08.06.2007 of the

erstwhile High Court and the appeal and cross objections preferred in

A.S.No.2582 of 1989 before the erstwhile High Court of Andhra

Pradesh dated 17.04.1985 arising against the judgment in O.S.No.211

of 1982 as mentioned above.

15. The counsel for the petitioner filed additional set of documents

which were not referred in the above said representation of the

petitioner as under:

"The proceedings of the TTD dated 28.11.2007, 09.07.2008, 16.09.2009, 12.01.2011, 18.12.2012, 24.04.2014 and the G.O.Ms.No.1784 dated 04.11.1965 of Government of Andhra

W.P. No.13062 of 2022 BKM, J

Pradesh relating to the according permission to Sri G.S.Viswamurthy to perform Muthyalaharathi Seva in Ekantha seva of Lord Sri Venkateswara, fixation of Sambhavana (emoluments), allotment of accommodation at Tirumala, enhancement of Sambhavana (increase of emoluments) to him, to perform Dhupa, deepa, naivedyam every day at Matrusri Tarigonda Vengamamba Brindavanam by him, enhancement of Sambhavana (increase of emoluments) to him and confirmation of title of Lord Sri Venkateswara Swamy in respect of Ac.10 1/3 square miles of land near and around the temple respectively."

16. As discussed supra, none of the above said proceedings establish

either any interest or possession of the petitioner for the present over the

Matrusri Tarigonda Vengamamba Brindavanam and the surrounding

site area at Tirumala. That apart the material available on record clearly

manifests the title of Lord Sri Venkateswara Swamy and the possession

and administrative control of the 2nd respondent-TTD over the said

Brindavanam and the surrounding area at Tirumala. When the

2nd respondent-TTD itself is protecting the said Brindavanam and

developing the surrounding area for the convenience of the devotees as

stated above, the above said petitioner's representation dated

W.P. No.13062 of 2022 BKM, J

08.12.2021 need not be considered by the addressee as no right accrues