In a significant ruling on property rights and procedural compliance, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has underscored the mandatory nature of Section 83 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987. The Court held that the Endowments Department cannot auction land claimed by private individuals without adhering to the prescribed procedure, even if the department asserts ownership.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The petitioner, N. Srinivas Reddy, an agriculturist from Mudumala Village, Kurnool District, challenged the auction notification dated 02.07.2015 issued by the 5th respondent, Sri Eswara Anjaneya Swamy Devasthanam, proposing to auction 6.43 acres of land in Survey No. 328, Kondapuram Revenue Village. The petitioner claimed absolute ownership of the land, having purchased it through two registered sale deeds: Doc. No. 1725/1993 dated 17.11.1993 (3.22 acres) and Doc. No. 1751/1993 dated 07.12.1993 (3.21 acres), both registered in the Sub-Registrar Office, Gudur, Kurnool District. The vendors of the land were stated to have acquired it from inamdars.
Key Facts
- The petitioner purchased the land via two registered sale deeds in 1993, totaling 6.43 acres
- The 5th respondent issued an auction notification on 02.07.2015 for the same land, proposing to conduct the auction on 11.07.2015
- The petitioner contended that the respondents treated him as an encroacher without following the procedure under Section 83(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987
- The respondents claimed the land belonged to Sri Eswara Anjaneya Swamy Devasthanam but failed to produce documentary evidence supporting their ownership
Procedural History
- 2015: The petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 21206 of 2015 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus to quash the auction notification
- The petition was listed before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati on 17.06.2026
Relief Sought
The petitioner sought:
- A declaration that the auction notification dated 02.07.2015 was illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional
- A direction to forbear the 5th respondent from conducting the public auction of the petitioner’s land
- Recognition of the petitioner’s ownership based on registered sale deeds
The Legal Issue
The central question was whether the Endowments Department can auction land claimed by a private individual without following the mandatory procedure under Section 83 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987, merely on the basis of a bald assertion of ownership in a counter-affidavit.
Arguments Presented
For the Petitioner
- The petitioner argued that he was the absolute owner of the land, having purchased it through registered sale deeds in 1993
- The respondents’ failure to follow the procedure under Section 83(2) of the Act rendered the auction notification illegal and arbitrary
- The respondents did not produce any documentary evidence to prove their ownership of the land
For the Respondents
- The respondents contended that the land in Survey No. 328 belonged to Sri Eswara Anjaneya Swamy Devasthanam, as recorded in the RSR (Record of Rights)
- They argued that the petitioner had no rights or title over the property and thus could not invoke Section 83 of the Act
The Court's Analysis
The Court critically examined the respondents’ claim and found that they had failed to produce any documentary evidence to substantiate their ownership of the land. The Court observed:
"The respondents have not provided any document to support their claim that the land in Sy.No.328 is owned or belongs to Sri Eswara Anjaneya Swamy Devasthanam, except a bald assertion in the counter affidavit. If the respondents contend that the property belongs to the Endowments Department, they must adhere to the procedures outlined in Section 83 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987."
The Court emphasized that procedural compliance under Section 83 is mandatory before any action can be taken against individuals claiming ownership of land under dispute. The failure to follow this procedure rendered the auction notification illegal and arbitrary.
The Verdict
The Court disposed of the writ petition with the following directions:
- The auction notification dated 02.07.2015 was held illegal and unconstitutional
- The 5th respondent was directed to forbear from conducting the public auction of the petitioner’s land
- The Court did not grant any monetary relief or costs to the petitioner
- The order was passed without any order as to costs
What This Means For Similar Cases
Procedural Compliance Is Non-Negotiable
This judgment reinforces that government departments, including the Endowments Department, cannot bypass statutory procedures when dealing with private property claims. Practitioners should note:
- Section 83 of the Act mandates a specific procedure before auctioning land claimed by private individuals
- Mere assertions in a counter-affidavit without documentary evidence are insufficient to establish ownership
Documentary Evidence Trumps Bald Assertions
- The Court rejected the respondents’ claim due to the absence of supporting documents
- Practitioners must ensure that all ownership claims are backed by concrete evidence, such as land records, sale deeds, or revenue documents
- In disputes involving government or religious institutions, the burden of proof lies heavily on the department to establish title
Remedies for Affected Property Owners
- Property owners facing unlawful auction notifications can challenge them under Article 226 by demonstrating procedural non-compliance
- The judgment provides a precedent for quashing arbitrary actions by government departments where mandatory procedures are ignored
