Authority: High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction), Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao
Order Date: 28 July 2026
Case Overview
- Petitioner: Namala Veerraju, aged about 74, residing at LIG 104, APIC Colony, Ida Jeedimeta, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana.
- Respondents: (1) State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by Principal Secretary, Revenue Department; (2) Endowments Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Commissioner; (3) Sri Malleswara Swamy Vari Devasthanam, represented by its Executive Officer‑cum‑Special Deputy Collector.
- Relief Sought: Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution to declare inaction of the 3rd respondent for not considering the petitioner’s explanation dated 23 July 2026 to the notice issued under Section 83(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (notice dated 17 Feb 2026, received on 20 July 2026). The petitioner also seeks a stay on eviction from agricultural land measuring Ac. 0.78 cents in Sy. No. 110/3, Thatapudi Village, Kapileswarapuram Mandal, East Godavari District.
- Notice Details: Respondents issued a notice on 17 Feb 2026 directing the petitioner to vacate the said land. The petitioner submitted an explanation on 23 July 2026, which the respondents allegedly failed to consider.
- Counsel: Petitioner's counsel – Anil Kumar Dasari; Respondents' counsel – GP for Revenue and GP for Endowments.
- Legal Submissions: Petitioner's counsel argued absolute ownership of the property and non‑compliance of the notice with the form prescribed under the Act. Respondents' counsel contended that the notice was issued under Section 83(5) and that any remedy lies before the Tribunal under Section 87 of the Act.
Final Outcome
- The Court, without delving into merits, directs the respondents to examine the petitioner’s explanation dated 23 July 2026 in a proper perspective and communicate their decision to the petitioner.
- Respondents are prohibited from taking any coercive steps (including eviction) until such communication is made.
- If aggrieved by the respondents’ subsequent order, the petitioner is directed to invoke the remedy provided under Section 87 of the Act before the appropriate Tribunal.
- No order as to costs was made.
- Any pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, are stood closed.
- Note: Issue Court Copy by 29 July 2026, B/o. KBN.
Topics: Land Dispute, Religious Endowment, Procedural Law