Telangana High Court
Smt M.Rajarani Bai vs The State Of Telangana on 17 June, 2025
THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
AND
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA
WRIT APPEAL No.1404 of 2024
JUDGMENT:
(Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul)
Sri K.Sai Rama Murthy, learned counsel appearing for
Ms.A.Jayashree, learned counsel for the appellants and
Sri Bhukya Mangilal Naik, learned Government Pleader for
Endowment Department, for respondent Nos.1 to 4.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants advanced singular
contention. He fairly submits that the relief claimed by the
appellants, who were petitioners in the writ petition, was vague
and ambiguous. Thus, the appellants may be given liberty to file a
fresh writ petition which is properly constituted.
3. The prayer is opposed by the other side by contending that
the writ Court while dismissing the writ petition granted liberty to
the appellants to approach the Endowments Tribunal for the
present grievance.
4. Faced with this, learned counsel or the appellants submits
that if the documents filed with the writ petition are examined
thoroughly, this Court itself can interfere in the matter.
5. Learned Government Pleader for Endowment Department
placed reliance on a recent judgment passed by this Court in
W.A.No.580 of 2025 which was decided on 13.06.2025.
6. No other point is raised before us.
7. During the course of hearing, when a specific question was
raised by this Court that when Endowments Tribunal for the
purpose of deciding the disputes relating to the Telangana
Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act,
1987, is in place which can deal with both factual and legal
aspects, why this Court should short circuit the said remedy and
directly entertain the petition, learned counsel for the appellants
submits that the petition is indeed maintainable and this Court,
after perusal of the record, can decide the matter.
8. Merely because the petition is maintainable, it is not
necessary for this Court to "entertain the same". The
"entertainability" and "maintainability" are two different facets. No
amount of argument can be advanced as to why the aforesaid
remedy before the Endowments Tribunal is not efficacious. In
view of the statutory efficacious remedy available to the appellants
before the Endowments Tribunal and in view of the judgment
passed by this Court in W.A.No.580 of 2025, we find no reason to
interfere in this appeal. Liberty as granted by the writ Court shall
remain intact for the appellants to approach the Endowments
Tribunal.
9. Accordingly, the writ appeal is disposed of. No order as to
costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________________
SUJOY PAUL, ACJ
__________________________
RENUKA YARA, J
17.06.2025
sa/vs
THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
AND
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA
(Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul)
17.06.2025
sa/vs
