Smt. Sama Lakshmamma And 3 Others vs State Of Telangana And 7 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 6284 Tel

                                -1-


            HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO
                           AND
           HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO

             WRIT PETITION No.15369 OF 2020

                      Date: 01.12.2022

Between:

Sama Lakshmamma, W/o. late Lakshma Reddy
Aged about 70 years, Occ : Housewife
R/o. 2-1-67, Upperpally, Rajendranagar Mandal,
R.R. District and 3 others.

                                                  .....Petitioners
     And

State of Telangana
Revenue (Endowments)Department
Rep. by its Principal Secretary,
Secretary, Hyderabad
And 7 others.

                                                 .....Respondents

The Court made the following:

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO

WRIT PETITION No.15369 OF 2020

ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Naveen Rao)

It was reported in newspapers that large extent of land

belonging to Sri Rambaugh and Kishanbaugh temples illegally

encroached and the temple properties are being sold to third

parties whereas no action was taken by the Endowment and

Revenue authorities. The Hon'ble Lokayukta has taken

cognizance of the newspaper item and registered as Complaint

Nos.3154/2013/B1, 3165/2012/B1 & 1908/2010/B1. After

calling for reports from the Endowment authorities and the

Revenue authorities, on 27.07.2015, following directions are

issued:

"As I see the report, the further encroachments can be stopped, provided Municipal corporation filters the applications for constructions, by imposing a condition of getting no objection certificates from the concerned Assistant commissioner of endowments, be it, Hyderabad, Secunderabad or Ranga Reddy. The Commissioner of GHMC is directed to take steps to ensure the compliance of the aforesaid condition and file his compliance report, by 30.11.2015.

The Deputy Collectors/Tahsildars of Shamshabad, Shamirpet, Rajendranagar Mandals of R.R. district and also Deputy Collector/Tahsildar of Bahadurpura Mandal of Hyderabad District are directed to mutate the names of the endowments, as requested by the concerned Assistant Commissioners of Endowments and file their compliance reports, by 30.11.2015".

2. On 30.11.2015 following directions are issued:

"Hence, both the Collectors of Hyderabad and Rangareddy Districts are directed to issue necessary instructions to the concerned Tahsildars of both the Hyderabad and Ranga Reddy Districts, to mutate the name of Sri Murali Manohara Swami Temple as pattadar of the lands belonging to the same temple. The Commissioner, GHMC and the District Panchayat Officer, Ranga Reddy District are also directed to instruct the concerned City Planner/Assistant city Planners within whose jurisdiction, the aforesaid endowment properties are located, not to grant any permissions for constructions.

The Assistant Commissioners of endowments of Hydraabd and Ranga Reddy districts are directed to lease out by auction of the vacant properties for the purpose of augmentation of income to the aforesaid endowment. The compliance reports be filed by both the Collectors of Hyderabad and Ranga Reddy Districts, the Commissioner, GHMC, the District Panchayat Officer, Rangareddy District and the Assistant Commissioners of Endowments, Hyderabad and Ranga Reddy Districts, by 23.02.2016. The afore mentioned directions are also applicable with regard to (1) Sri Seetharamachandra Swami Temple, Attapur Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Rangareddy District, (2) Sri anantha Padmanabha Swami Temple, attapur Village and (3) Sri Surya Chandra Swami Temple, Attapur Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District".

3. It appears based on these directions; revenue entries are

corrected. Having come to know that such revenue entries were

made affecting the rights of the petitioners the present writ

petition is filed challenging the directions issued by Hon'ble

Lokayukta vide orders dated 27.07.2015 and 30.11.2015 and

the consequential steps taken by the revenue authorities in

compliance of the directions of the Hon'ble Lokayukta.

4. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned

Standing Counsel for the Endowments and learned Standing

Counsel for the Hon'ble Lokayukta.

5. Learned Standing Counsel for the Endowments has taken

us through various documents to show that false claims are

made illegally to knock away endowment lands and the record

placed before the Court would clearly show that the entire lands

which were considered by the Hon'ble Lokayukta are the

endowment lands and these persons have no manner of right to

occupy or to undertake sale transactions on those lands.

Therefore, Hon'ble Lokayukta validly passed the orders

protecting the lands belonging to Endowment.

6. What is contended by the learned Standing Counsel for the

Endowment Institution may be true. However, only point for

consideration in this writ petition is whether the Hon'ble

Lokayukta has got power and jurisdiction to issue directions as

assailed in this writ petition.

7. Challenging the orders of the Hon'ble Lokayukta dated

30.11.2015 W.P. No.4449 of 2017 is filed. Vide its judgment

dated 9.3.2021 the writ petition was allowed, setting aside the

order dated 30.11.2015 of the Hon'ble Lokayukta.

8. Before this Court, in this writ petition as well as in W.P.

No.4449 of 2017, challenge to the orders of the Hon'ble

Lokayukta is on the ground of jurisdiction and competence of

Hon'ble Lokayukta to pass orders.

9. Following the earlier decision of larger Bench of this Court

in Dr.R.G. Sunil Reddy Vs. The A.P Lokayukta, Hyderabad

and two others1 (in W.P. No.7615 of 2013, dated 20.08.2015)

the writ petition No.4449 of 2017 was allowed.

10. For the reasons noted therein, this writ petition is allowed,

setting aside the orders of the Hon'ble Lokayukta, dated

27.07.2015, and 30.11.2015 in Complaint Nos.3154/2013/B1,

3165/2012/B1 and 1908/2010/B1. However, it is made clear

that it is always open to respondent Nos.5 to 7 to take all

measures to protect the endowment lands. This order does not

come in the way of the respondents 5 to 7 working out the

remedies as available in law.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

______________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J

_______________________ J.SREENIVAS RAO, J 29th November, 2022 Skj/Pt.

2015 SCC OnLine 368

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO

WRIT PETITION No.15369 OF 2020

Date: 01.12.2022

Skj/Pt.