CC/203/2018
2022 Latest Caselaw 2352 AP

                                      1



      THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

                  CONTEMPT CASE No.203 of 2018

ORDER:-

      This Contempt Case has been filed complaining willful

disobedience in implementing the Order dated 03.12.2014 passed

by this Court in W.P.No.28473 of 2013.

02.   The petitioners herein filed W.P.No.28473 of 2013 before this

Court to direct the respondents not to exercise any authority or

jurisdiction over the subject properties in O.A.No.145 of 1983 on

the file of the then Deputy Commissioner, Endowment

Department, Guntur i.e., Dechirajuwari Choultry situated at

Pedanandipadu and its properties, which are inam lands

admeasuring Ac. 10.95 cents of Kommur (v), Bapatla Taluq with

Patta No. 1045, Ac. 12.62 cents at Pedanandipadu (v), Bapatla

Talu with Patta. No. 527 and Ac.15.20 cents at Marturu (v),

Marturu Taluq with Patta No. 1454 for which the petitioner's

ancestors were granted ryothwari pattas under the provisions of

A.P. Inam Abolition Act, 1956, in the light of judgment of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court of India reported in Peddinti Venkata

Muraliranganatha Desika Iyengar v. Govt. of A.P (AIR 1996 SC

966) and in view of non-publication of any notification U/s. 6 of A

P. Charitable & Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act,

1966, and in the absence of registration U/s 38 of the said Act by

declaring the order dt. 26.3.1985 passed in 0.A. 145 of 1983 on

the file of the then Deputy Commissioner, Endowments

Department, Guntur, as illegal, unenforceable and without

jurisdiction also for want of publication U/s 77 of Endowment Act,

1966.

03. This Court, while disposing of the said Writ Petition, passed

the following Order on 03-12-2014:

"In this view of the matter, it has to be held that the order dt.26-03-1985 in O.A.No.145 of 1983 is without jurisdiction. So it is declared as null and void. It is further declared that the Dechirajuwari Choultry and the above properties are the private properties of petitioners and respondent Nos.5 and 6, and respondent Nos.1 to 4 have no right to interfere with either the Management of the said Choultry or its properties in any manner".

04. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they are

the absolute owners of landed properties in Sy.No.302

admeasuring Ac.12.62 (patta No.527) and Choultry at

Pedanandipadu village, Ac.10.95 cents in Sy.No.766 of

Kommuru Village of Guntur District and Ac.15.20 cnts in

Sy.No.13 of Martur Village, Prakasam District. The petitioners

have submitted a copy of the Order dated 03.12.2014 in

W.P.No. 28473 of 2013 to the Assistant Commissioner,

Endowment, Ongole and Guntur and to the Deputy

Commissioner of Endowment, Guntur, with a request not to

interfere with their rights, in the light of orders of this Hon'ble

Court. Thereafter, the Assistant Commissioner, Endowment,

Ongole and Guntur, earlier prepared Annexure III Notifications

under Section 22A (1) (c) of Registration Act, showing the

subject properties of the petitioners as owned by Charitable

Institution and forwarded the same to the Registering Authority,

Martur of Prakasam District and Kakumanu, Guntur District,

totally in violation of the Orders of this Hon'ble Court. When the

petitioners approached the registering authorities to know the

Stamp Valuation and Registration Charges for their properties as

they intend to sell the subject properties, the registering

authorities refused to reveal the said information on the ground

that the properties are in the prohibited lists forwarded by the

Assistant Commissioner, Guntur and Ongole. Thereupon, the

petitioners filed W.P.Nos.12057 and 11978 of 2016, seeking to

nullify the notifications issued by the Assistant Commissioner,

Endowment, Guntur and Ongole under Section 22 A (1) (c) of

the Registration Act. This Hon'ble Court while admitting the

above Writ Petitions suspended the above said notifications on

12.04.2016 and issued suo moto contempt proceedings against

the Assistant Commissioner of Guntur and Ongole and the same

are pending for consideration. In spite of the orders of this

Hon'ble Court, the registering authorities are refusing to furnish

any information on the ground that they cannot receive any

document for registration.

05. In the month of December, 2017, the petitioners again

approached the Registering Authority for registration of their

sale documents with a request to furnish the values of Stamp

and Registration, but the Registering Authority at Martur,

refused to reveal the values on the ground that the properties

are entered in the prohibitory lists as per Annexure III U/s 22A

(1) (c) of the Registration Act. The copies obtained by the

petitioners from the registering authorities reveal that the

Commissioner, Endowments in Rc.No.M2/9576/2016, dt.

04.06.2016, informed the registering authorities to enter the

subject properties in the prohibited lists, while enclosing the

copy of Annexure III U/s 22A (1) (c) of the Registration Act

prepared and singed by the Assistant Commissioner, Ongole and

Guntur. The petitioners submitted a representation dated

17.07.2017 to the Hon'ble Commissioner, Endowments at

Vijayawada, seeking deletion of the subject properties from the

prohibited lists of transfer in the light of the Orders of this

Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.28473 of 2013, but till date, no action

has been taken by the respondents. It seems, the respondents

have no intention to implement the orders of this Court and

they are deliberately flouting the orders of this Court on one

pretext or the other. The failure on the part of the respondents

in implementing the orders of this Court would amount to

disobedience of the orders of this Hon'ble Court and, therefore,

they are liable for punishment under Sections of 10 to 12 of the

Contempt of Courts Act. Complaining the same, the petitioners

have filed the present Contempt Case.

06. Respondent No.1 filed Counter Affidavit contending that

W.P.No.28473 of 2013 was filed that Sri Dechirajuvari Choultry

is a private one and the Endowments Department has no right

over the same. The said Writ Petition was allowed on

03.12.2014 on the ground that the then Manager of the

Choultry could not file the Notification copy of the said Choultry

along with the Counter Affidavit. As the said G.O., was

procured at later point of time, a Writ Appeal was preferred

against the said Order dated 03.12.2014 along with delay

condonation petition and there is every chance of succeeding in

the Writ Appeal by the Endowments Department.

ii) Sri Dechirajuwari Choultry, Pedanandipadu, Guntur

District, is the absolute owner of the land admeasuring Ac.10.95

cents in Sy.No.766 of Kommuru Village, Bapatla Taluk, Ac.12.62

cents in Sy.No.302 of Peddannadipadu Village and Ac.15.20

cents in Sy.No.13 of Marturu Village. Sri D. Venkat Rao, filed an

application in OA No.145 of 1983 before the Deputy

Commissioner, Endowments Department, Guntur, for

declaration that Dechirajuwari Choultry and its properties are

private properties of Sri Venkat Rao and their ancestors. The

said OA was decided against Sri Venkat Rao holding that the

institution is a public charitable institution and properties are set

apart for the maintenance of the public charitable institution

vide Order dated 26.03.1985. Aggrieved by the action of the

Deputy Commissioner, Sri Venkat Rao filed a suit in O.S.No.44

of 1985 on the file of District Judge, Guntur, as per the

provisions of Act 17 of 1966. The said suit was dismissed by

the learned District Judge, Guntur, vide its Judgment and

Decree dated 24.04.1989. Pending suit, Act 17/1996 was

repealed and in its place Act 30/1987 came into existence.

Aggrieved by the judgment and Decree in O.S.No.44 of 1985

passed by the learned District Judge, Sri Venkat Rao preferred

an appeal in AS No.1445 of 1989 before this Hon'ble Court.

Pending appeal, Sri Venkat Rao died and the legal

representatives of Venkat Rao were brought on record.

Thereafter, this Hon'ble Court dismissed the said appeal. The

legal representatives of Sri Venkat Rao preferred SLP No.21041

of 2007 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the same was

dismissed on 20.11.2007.

iii) While the matter stood thus, the legal representatives

of Sri Venkat Rao preferred a Review Petition ASMP No.1960 of

2013 in AS No.1445 of 1989 before this Hon'ble Court and the

same was allowed by an order dated 21.08.2013 holding thus:

"After Act 30 of 1987 came into force on 25.05.1987 although the Deputy Commissioner had jurisdiction to decide the above dispute, by virtue of Act 33 of 1987 w.e.f., 03.01.2008, even his jurisdiction to decide the said issues has been taken away and has been conferred on the Endowments Departments Tribunal. Be that as it may, on the day when OA.No.145/1983 was decided by the Deputy Commissioner, Endowments Department, Guntur i.e., 26.03.1985, he did not have jurisdiction to decide it.

As the judgments and decrees in OS.No.44/1985 and AS.No.1445/1989 are both declared as a nullity and the findings recorded therein are held to be without jurisdiction supra, the said orders are accordingly set-aside. It is open to the petitioners to avail an appropriate remedy to challenge the order dated: 26.03.1985 in OA.No.145/1983 of the Deputy Commissioner, Endowments Department, Guntur, if they so choose".

iv) It is contended that Sri Dechirajuwari Choultry

Pedanandipadu was declared as a Public Institution under

Section 6 (c) (i) of the Act 17 of 1996 in Sl.No.385 in the

Commissioner's Proceedings vide R.Dis.No.J2/10175/77, dt.

18.04.1977 and as such, the petitioners cannot say that the

Choultry is a private property. It is contended that the

averment of the petitioner as to Section 155 (2) of Act 30/87,

the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP No.21041 of 2007

was taken note of by this Hon'ble Court and the Judgments and

Decrees in A.S.No.1445 of 1989 and O.S.No.44 of 1985 were

set aside. As this Hon'ble Court admitted the petitioners to avail

the remedy available as to the correctness of the Order of the

Deputy Commissioner, Endowments Department, Guntur, in

O.A.No.145 of 1983, the petitioners have challenged the same

by way of Writ Petition and the same was allowed. Aggrieved

by the same, the respondents preferred Writ Appeal and the

same is pending.

v) it is contended that the averments of the petitioner that

their ancestors have not endowed the properties and they are

the private properties and as such, intimation sent by the

Assistant Commissioners are illegal and they have every right to

enjoy the properties are made for the sake of the Writ Petition.

In fact, whether the properties are the private properties or the

properties attached to the subject choultry are not will be

subject to the result of the Writ Appeal pending before this

Hon'ble Court and as such, the proposal of the petitioners for

alienating the properties by filing Writ Petitions one after other

under the guise of the Orders passed in W.P.No.28473 of 2013

is vexatious and nothing but to frustrate the very cause of

action and the Writ Appeal. It is further contended that show

cause notices were issued for suo moto contempt case in

W.P.No.12057 of 2016 and affidavits are also filed by the

respondents and the same is pending, and as such, with the

similar prayer, the present Contempt Case is not maintainable

and the same has to be heard along with w.P.No.12057 of 2016

and the results in both the Writ Petitions will be subject to the

outcome of W.A.Sr.No.109984 of 2015. Therefore, there are no

merits in the Contempt Case and therefore, he sought for

dismissal the Contempt Case.

07. Respondent Nos.2 to 4 filed Counter Affidavits contending

in similar lines to that of the contents mentioned in the Counter

Affidavit filed by Respondent No.1.

08. Respondent No.3 filed Additional Affidavit contending that

pursuant to the Orders passed by this Court dated 03.12.2014

in W.P.No.28473 of 2013, he issued proceedings in

Lr.Rc.No.M2/681378/2017, dated 08.06.2018, denotifing the

subject properties i.e., (1) Sy.No.13 of Marturu (V & M),

Prakasam District, to an extent of Ac.15.20 cents; (2)

Sy.No.766 of Kommuru Village, Kakumanu Mandal, Guntur

District, to an extent of Ac.10.95 cents and (3) Sy.No.302 of

Pedanandipadu (V & M), Guntur District to an extent of Ac.12.62

cents, totaling Ac. 38.77 cents, from the Prohibited List

submitted under Section 22-A(1) (c) of the Registration Act,

subject to outcome of the Orders in Writ Appeal, which is

pending before the Hon'ble High Court, and communicated the

same immediately to the Commissioner and Inspector General,

Stamps and Registration Department, Vijayawada, and as such,

he has complied the Orders passed by this Court in Writ Petition

No.28473 of 2013. The delay in complying with the orders of

this Hon'ble Court is neither willful nor wanton, but due to

administrative reasons.

09. Respondent No.4 further contended that respondent No.3

passed orders in Rc.No.M2/681378/2017, dated 08.06.2018,

denotifying the subject lands, subject to the outcome of the Writ

Appeal No.916 of 2018, in due compliance of the Orders of this

Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.28473 of 2013, dated 3.12.2014 and

the same was informed to the Commissioner and the Inspector

General, Stamps and Registration, Vijayawada. This Hon'ble

Court granted suspension of the Orders passed in W.P.No.28473

of 2013 in I.A.No.3 of 2018 in W.A.No.916 of 2018, dated

10.07.2018. There is no willful default or deliberate violation of

the Orders passed by this Court by this respondent. Therefore,

the present Contempt Case is liable to be dismissed against

respondent No.4.

10. Heard Sri P. Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel for the

petitioners, and Smt P. Rajini Reddy, learned Counsel for

Respondents and perused the material available on record.

11. This Court passed Order in W.P.No.28473 of 2013 on

03.12.2014. Aggrieved by the same, the respondents filed

W.A.No.916 of 2018. A Division Bench of this Court by its Order

dated 10.07.2018 in I.A.No.3 of 2018 in W.A.No.916 of 2018

suspended the Order in W.P.No.28473 of 2013. However, the

respondent No.3 passed Orders in Lr.R.C.No.M2/681378/2017,

dated 08.06.2018, denotifying the subject lands from the

prohibited list of the properties in due compliance of the Order

of the Court in W.P.No.28473 of 2013, dated 3.12.2014.

12. On careful examination of the entire record, in our view,

with an intention to protect the endowment lands, the

respondents have taken up several steps. Due to that reason,

the delay occurred in implementing the Order of this Court. As

the Order is complied with on 08.06.2018, subject to the

outcome of the Writ Appeal No.916 of 2018, in our view, there

is no willful disobedience by the respondents in implementing

the Order of this Court in true spirit.

13. The Respondents through their Affidavits tendered their

unconditional apology by stating the reasons for the delay

occurred. This Court satisfied that the respondents made

attempts to protect the subject lands and in that process, some

delay occurred, and as such, in the opinion of this Court, the

unconditional apology tendered by the respondents is bonafide

and to be accepted.

14. For the reasons stated above, the unconditional apology

tendered by the respondents is accepted.

15. Accordingly, this Contempt Case is closed.

16. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this case shall stand closed.

______________________ JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND Date: 04.05.2022

eha

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

C.C.No.203 of 2018

Dt. 04.05.2022

eha