S.Vishnavi vs The State of Telagnana and 2 others

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO Between: S.Vishnavi, W/o.

Vishnu Charan, aged about 45 years, Occ.

Propritrix of Tirumala Enterprises, H.No.3-6-369/8/1, Street No.2, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad. ..PETITIONER AND 1 The State of Telagnana, Endowments Depadment, Secretariat Building, Secretariat, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Principal Secretary.

2.

The Commissioner, Endowments Department, Tilak Road, Hyderabad.

3.

Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Vari Devasthanam, Yadagirigutta, Rep. by its Executive Officer- ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of lVandamus declaring the Notice lnviting the Tender by the 3rd respondent for lease and license for annual maintenance of Kalyanamandapam at Bharkatpura, Hyderabad, is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and in violation of Articles 14 and '1 9 (1)(g) of the Constitution of lndia and also contrary to the Orders passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.15923 of 2021 , daled 147.2021 and set aside the same, consequently direct the 3rd respondent to hand over the possession of the Kalyanamandapam to the petrtioner as directed by this Honble Court in W.P.No.'1 5923 of 2021 dated 14.7.2021 .

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl.

V V N NARAYANA RAO Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.

1 & 2: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS Counsel for the Respondent No.

3: SRl.

JAGAN MOHAN REDDY KOTHA (SC FOR LNSV DEVASTHANAM) The Court made the following: ORDER.

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 18346 OF 2022 lA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the No to the Notice lnviting the Tender by the 3rd respondent for lease and license for annual maintenance of Kalyanamandapam at Bharkatpura, Hyderabad pending disposal of the writ petition.

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A,ABHISHEK REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1.8346 of 2022 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Enclowments appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2, and Sri K Jagar.r Mohan Recldy, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respont-lent No.3 - Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Vari Devasthanam, Yar.lagirigu tta.

With their cousent, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the sLrge of a.l n-rissior-r itself.

Challenging the Notice Inviting Tender issued by the respondent No.3 Tempie for Lease and Licence for Annual Maintenance of Kalyanamandapam at Barkathpura, Hyderabad, the petitioner has filed the The learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that on an earlier occasion, the petitioner has approached this Court and filed W.P.No.15923 of 2021. anci this Court has clisposed of the said Writ Petition pirie order clatecl 14.07.2021 clirecting the responclents to permit the petitioner to continue the lease periocl for a period of one vear by granting fresh lease in her favour.

Thc learned counsel has further stated that if one year extension is taken flom the date of passing of the orcler \.e., 1,4.07.2021, the official ,/, / present writ petition.

2 respondents are obligated to permit the petitioner to continue to tlrairrtain the Kalyanamandapam of the respondent No.3 Temple till July, 2022.

But, without considering the same, the respondent No.3-Temple has issued the impugned tender notice inviting bids for maintenance of the very same Kalyanamandapam, and therefore, prayed to set aside the impugned tender notice.

Per conlra, Sri K.

Jagan Mohan Reddy, the learned Standing Counsel, has vehemently opposed the very maintair. maintair.rability of the writ petition, and has stated that originally, the lease period granted in favour of thc petitioner was from September, 2019 till the enci of September',2020.

But, subsequently, by virtue of the order dated 14.07.2021, passed by this Court in W.P.No.15923 of 2021, the lease period was extended ti1l Septernlrer, 2021.

The learned Standing Counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 14.07.2021 passed by this Court in W.P.No.15923 ot 2021, wherein this Court has directed the petitioner to clear the arrears of iease amount within one month from the date of passing of the said order, and on such clearance, the respondent No.3 - Temple was directed to permit the petitioner to continue the lease period for the Year 2021 without any enhancement of the lease amount.

The learned Standing Counsel has further stated that the petitioner is not agreeable to the conditions and tl-rat she has to pay an amount of Rs.47,00,000/- towarcls arrears of rent.

1 l ) l I l l I 3 Acimittedly, the lease periocl of the Petitioner encled in September., 2020.

However, by virtue of the order dated 14.07.2021, passed by this Court in W.P.No.15923 of 2027, the lease period was extended by one year i.e.,, till the end of September , 202'1.

Once the lease period was ended, the petitiofier has no vested right to continue to maintain the I(alyanamandapam beyond the lease period.

If the petitioner has any interest in continuing lease period, she has to necessarily participate in the open tender called for by the respondent No.3.

Therefore, this Court does not fincl any merit in the present wlit Petition warranting interference under Article 226 of Constitution of India.

The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

However, it is left open to the petitioner to participate in the impugned tender called for by the rc.spondeut No.3, if she is so aclvisecl. aclvisecl.

At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that various articles belonging to the petitionel are still with the respondent No.3 - Temple, and that she will make a representation to the officials of the respondent No.3 - Temple and the officials of the respondent No'3 - Temple may be directed to handover the articles to the petitioner.

4 i Having regard to the above made submission, the petitioner is directed to make a representation to the officials of the respondent No.3 - Temple within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

On such representation being made, the officials of the respondcnt No.3 - Temple shall consicler the sarne on its own merits anr.l pass necessary orc'lers within a period of two weeks thereof The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closec{ There sl-rall be no order as to costs To, CYS P SD/-K.SAILES ASSISTANT REGIST R ,TRUE COPY' SECTION OFFICER 1.

The Principal Secretary, Endowments Department, State of Telagnana, Secretariat Building, S6cretariat, Hyderabad.

The Commissioner, Endowments Department, Tilak Road, Hyderabad' 3.

The Executive Officer, Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Vari Devasthanam, Yadagirigutta.

4.

One CC to SRl.

V V N NARAYANA RAO, Advocate. [OPUC] 5.

Two CCs to GP FOR ENDOWMENTS, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] 6.

JAGAN IUOHAN REDDY KOTHA, SC for LNSV Devasthanam. [OPUC] 7.

Two CD Copies.

8.

One Spare Copy.

BS \ \ HIGH COURT DATED: 1210412022 ORDER WP.No.18 2022,' DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 3 [ Jl]L 2022 I C' t c l\1 lr ,) s I 8\v a o+.1 */ ,/)7 \