Mangali Bhaskar vs The State Of Telangana
2022 Latest Caselaw 768 Tel

     THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                             AND
         THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI


                         WRIT APPEAL No.73 of 2022

JUDGMENT:     (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)




      The present writ appeal is arising out of order dated 16.12.2021

passed in W.P.No.34149 of 2021.

      The facts of the case reveal that the appellants/writ petitioners

came up before this Court by filing a writ petition under Article 226 of

the Constitution of India stating that they are in possession of the land

admeasuring 80 square yards in Sy.Nos.188 and 190 situated at Pedda

Dagada Village, Chinnambavi Mandal, Wanaparthy District and they are

also having Occupancy Right Certificate in their favour. In spite of the

aforesaid certificate, without initiating any proceedings as required under

Section 83 or 87 of the Telangana Charitable and Hindu Religious

Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short, "the Act"), public

notice dated 02.12.2021 was issued. The leaned Single Judge has

disposed of the writ petition against which the present writ appeal has

been filed.

      Learned counsel for the writ petitioners has argued before this

Court that once the Occupancy Right certificate was issued, no action

should have been initiated under the Act.

      Learned Government Advocate stated before this Court that the

occupancy right certificate was issued behind the back of Smt.

Venkateshwaramma and Sri Ramalinga Swamy Devasthanam, Bekkem

Village, Chinnamvavi Mandal, Wanaparthy District, respondent Nos.4

and 5 in the writ appeal and they were certainly not a party in the

proceedings under which the ORC was granted to the writ petitioners.

This Court has carefully gone through the order passed by the

learned Single Judge and the leaned Single Judge has arrived at a

conclusion that Section 87 of the Act provides for settlement of all kinds

of disputes in respect of endowment property. Section 87 of the Act

reads as under:

"87. Power of Endowments Tribunal to decide certain disputes and matters:- (1) The Endowments Tribunal having jurisdiction shall have the power, after giving notice in the prescribed manner to the person concerned, to enquire into and decide any dispute as to the question,-

(a) whether an institution or endowment is a charitable institution or endowment;

(b) whether an institution or endowment is a religious institution or endowment;

(c) whether any property is an endowment, if so whether it is a charitable endowment or a religious endowment;

(d) whether any property is a specific endowment;

(e) whether any person is entitled by custom or otherwise to any honor, emoluments or perquisites in any charitable or religious institution or endowment and what the established usage of such institution or endowment is in regard to any other matter;

(f) whether any institution or endowment is wholly or partly of a secular or religious character and whether any property is given wholly or partly for secular or religious uses; or

(g) where any property or money has been given for the support of an institution or endowment which is partly of a secular character and partly of a religious character or the performance of any service or charity connected with such institution or endowment or the performance of a charity which is partly of a secular character and partly of a religious character or where any property or money given is appropriated partly to secular uses and partly to religious uses, as to what portion of such property or money shall be allocated to secular or religious uses;

(h) whether a person is a founder or a member from the family of the founder of an institution or endowment.

(2) The Endowments Tribunal may, pending its decision under sub- section (1), pass such order as it deems fit for the administration of the property or custody of the money belonging to the institution or endowment.

(3) The Endowments Tribunal may while recording its decision under sub-section (1) and pending implementation of such decision, pass such interim order as it may deem fit for safeguarding the interests of the institution or endowment and for preventing damage to or loss or misappropriation or criminal breach of trust in respect of the properties or moneys belonging to or in the possession of the institution or endowment.

(4) The presumption in respect of matters covered by clauses (a), (b),

(c), (d) and (e) in sub-section (1) is that the institution or the endowment

is a public one and that the burden of proof in all such cases shall lie on the person claiming the institution or the endowment to be private or the property or money to be other than that of a religious endowment or specific endowment, as the case may be.

(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in the above sub-sections the Deputy Commissioner having jurisdiction shall continue to enquire into and decide the disputes referred to in sub-section (1) until the constitution of the Endowments Tribunal."

In the light of the aforesaid statutory provision of law, the leaned

Single Judge is certainly justified in disposing of the writ petition with a

liberty to the petitioners to work out their remedies before the

Endowment Tribunal. This Court does not find any reason to interfere

with the order passed by the leaned Single Judge. The admission is

declined.

Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be

no order as to costs.

__________________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ

________________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J 18.02.2022 ES