Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
The District Collector vs Gudipalli Bhanu Prakash Reddy on 24 March, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT APPEAL No.373 OF 2022
(Through physical mode)
The District Collector, Chittoor District,
Chittoor Town.
..Appellant
Versus
Gudipalli Bhanu Prakash Reddy,
S/o Gudipalli Rama Krishna Reddy,
Aged about 50 years,
R/o Door No.18-3-60/C4,
Shanti Nagar, Near Alipiri Police Station,
Khadi Colony, Tirupati (Urban)
Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh-517501
and others.
...Respondents
Counsel for the appellant : Mr. P. Sudhakara Reddy,
Additional Advocate General.
Counsel for respondent No.1 : Mr. Y.V. Ravi Prasad, Sr. counsel
for Mr. N. Ashwani Kumar
Counsel for respondent No.2 : GP for Endowments.
Counsel for respondent No.3 : Mr. S. Satyanarayana Prasad
Sr. Counsel.
ORAL JUDGMENT
Dt:24.03.2022
(per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)
This writ appeal has been listed as Lunch Motion on the request
made by the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the
appellant.
2. The order under challenge is an interim order passed by the
learned single Judge in W.P.No.6969 of 2022 staying all further
2 HCJ & MSM, J
W.A.No.373 of 2022
proceedings pursuant to the proceedings in Roc.B3/376708/2022, dated
14.03.2022 issued by respondent No.3 therein/appellant herein.
3. We are inclined to entertain this writ appeal even though it is
against the interim order for the reason that the consequences of the
interim order have the effect of causing imminent inconvenience to the
State Government in establishing the collectorate and other administrative
offices of newly to be formed district namely Sri Balaji District at Tirupati
by 02.04.2022.
4. In the course of hearing, it is informed that for establishment of the
collectorate and other administrative offices of the proposed new district
namely Sri Balaji District, the State Government does not have any other
suitable accommodation.
5. Mr. Y.V. Ravi Prasad, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. N.
Ashwani Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No.1/writ petitioner,
referring to Section 2(18)(b) r/w Section 111 (4) of the Andhra Pradesh
Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions & Endowments Act, 1987,
would contend that the subject building namely Sri Padmavathi Nilayam
having been constructed with the funds of the devotees/TTD for providing
facilities to the pilgrims visiting Tiruchanoor and Tirupati, it cannot be put
to use for any purpose other than the purpose for which it has been
constructed.
6. Countering the above submission, the learned Additional Advocate
General referred to Rule 150 of the Rules made vide G.O.Ms.No.311,
dated 09.04.1990 in exercise of powers conferred by Section 97 read with
Section 153 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious
Institutions & Endowments Act, 1987, wherein it is prescribed that
3 HCJ & MSM, J
W.A.No.373 of 2022
notwithstanding anything contained in these rules, the Board to Trustees
shall have power to lease the buildings, lands and any other property
belonging to the T.T.D on nomination for any number of years not
exceeding 99 years in favour of public institutions or public purposes only
after duly recording the reasons in writing and subject to ratification by
the Government. He would contend that the Rules enable the TTD to
lease out the subject building to any public institution or for public
purpose. According to him, establishment of collectorate and other
administrative offices of newly to be formed district is for the benefit of
the people residing in the geographical area of the proposed new district,
therefore, it is definitely for the public purpose and as such, there is no
illegality in leasing out the subject building to the proposed new district.
7. The writ petition is pending consideration before the learned single
Judge. Therefore, we are not inclined to record any finding on the rival
contentions made by the learned counsel for the parties. However, we
feel that the impugned interim order passed by the learned single Judge
will not only cause hardship to the administration but it will also defeat or
delay the establishment of collectorate and other administrative offices of
newly to be formed district namely Sri Balaji District by 2nd April, 2022.
Therefore, we are of the opinion that the order under appeal deserves to
be set aside.
8. Accordingly, the order under appeal is set aside. However,
respondent No.3 in the writ petition, who is appellant before us, shall not
effect any material changes in the subject building during the period of its
occupation. It is made clear that the learned single Judge shall decide the
writ petition without being influenced by the observations made in this
order.
4 HCJ & MSM, J
W.A.No.373 of 2022
9. Resultantly, the Writ Appeal is allowed in the above stated terms.
No costs. All the pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.
PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CJ M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J
Nn
