Dr. Kopalle Hanumantha Rao vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 6 April, 2026

    0
    32
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati

    Dr. Kopalle Hanumantha Rao vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 6 April, 2026

                                     ::1::
    
    
    
    APHC010203882025
                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
                                      PRADESH
                                                              [3329]
                                   AT AMARAVATI
                            (Special Original Jurisdiction)
    
                       MONDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL
                       TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
    
                                  PRESENT
    
          THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU
                        NIMMAGADDA
    
                               I.A.No.4 of 2025
    
                                      IN
    
                        WRIT PETITION NO: 10135/2025
    
    Between:
    
       1. DR. KOPALLE HANUMANTHA RAO,, S/O LATE SRINIVASA
          RAO, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O GOVERNORPETA,
          VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT.
    
                                                       ...PETITIONER
    
                                     AND
    
       1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS
          PRINCIPAL      SECRETARY        (ENDOWMENTS),
          SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI.
    
       2. THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT,
          GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA.
    
       3. THE    ANDHRA     JATEEYA   VIDYA   PARISHAD,
          MACHILIPATNAM,.KRISHNA DISTRICT.  REP. BY ITS
          EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
    
       4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KRISHNA DISTRICT,
                                      ::2::
    
    
    
         MACHILIPATNAM.
    
       5. THE STATION HOUSE             OFFICER,     INUKUDURU       PS,
          KRISHNA DISTRICT.
    
                                                   ...RESPONDENT(S):
    
          Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying
    that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the
    High Court may be pleased tomay be pleased to issue a WRIT OF
    MANDAMUS or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction to
    DECLARE the e-mail correspondence dated 17.04.2025 at 7.26
    PM by the 3rd respondent purportedly informing no celebration of
    the institutions founders day on 26.04.2025, as illegal, arbitrary,
    without authority, pervert, violation of custom, usage and practice
    of the 3rd respondent institution, dereliction of duty besides
    violative of the        provisions of AP Charitable and Religious
    Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 and contrary to Articles 14,
    25 and 26 of Constitution of India and consequently COMMAND
    the respondent officials to perform the Founders Day celebration
    on 26.04.2025 in the 3rd respondent institution under my lawful
    directions with active participation of staff and students of the
    institution, in the interest of justice and pass Prayer is amended as
    per Court's Order dt. 07.05.2025 in IA.No. 3 of 2025.
    
    Counsel for the Petitioner:
    
       1. P RAJASEKHAR
    
    Counsel for the Respondent(S):
    
       1. GP FOR HOME
    
       2. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS
    
       3. PULIPATI RADHIKA
                                      ::3::
    
    
    
         HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
    
    
    
                              I.A.No.4 of 2025
    
                                      IN
    
                     WRIT PETITION NO: 10135/2025
    
    This Court made the following
    
    
    ORDER:

    Learned Counsel for the petitioner insisted for urgent hearing

    in I.A.No.4 of 2025 wherein he sought for conducting Founder’s

    SPONSORED

    Day Celebration preferably on 26.04.2025 or on any nearest future

    date at the 3rd Respondent institution.

    2. It appears that no interim orders were passed in conducting

    Founder’s Day celebration in the year 2025 as requested by

    learned counsel for the petitioner.

    3. Learned counsel draw the attention of this Court towards the

    register copy maintained under Section – 43 of Andhra Pradesh

    Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act,

    1987 (for short “Act, 1987) of the 3rd Respondent institution

    whereunder the founder’s day was notified as one of the day to be

    celebrated / observed by the 3rd respondent institution. He submits

    that as per the Section 13 of the Act, 1987, once any festival,
    ::4::

    celebration or custom or any other prominence activity was notified

    in Section 43 Register of the particular institution, the same shall

    be conducted as per the said notification and it cannot be

    interdicted by any Endowment Authority. Since the Founder’s day

    is notified as per the 43 – Register in compliance of the Section 13

    of the Act, 1987, the same should be conducted on 08.04.2026.

    The other claim of the petitioner that the petitioner herein is a

    recognized founder family member since decades and he should

    be allowed to conduct Founder’s Day which is notified celebration

    day of the 3rd respondent institution.

    4. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader disputed

    the claim of the petitioner that the founder’s day should be

    celebrated. The claim of the petitioner regarding Founder’s day

    which is birthday of founder Sri Kopalle Hanumantha Rao Panthulu

    Garu need not be observed for the reason apart from himself there

    are 3 other members and altogether founded the 3rd Respondent

    institution with the contribution of public funds. Once any

    Charitable or Endowment Institution was founded with the public

    funds, no Founder’s day can be celebrated as per Explanation – III

    of Section – 17 of the Act, 1987. He also submits that the claim of

    the petitioner that Sri Kopalle Hanumantha Rao Panthulu Garu is
    ::5::

    only founder cannot be accepted, but there are 3 more founders.

    Therefore, the birthday of Sri Kopalle Hanumantha Rao Panthulu

    Garu cannot be conducted as Founder’s day, which is contrary to

    Explanation-III of Section 17 of the Act, 1987. He also denied the

    claim of the petitioner that the petitioner herein is recognized

    founder family member. The proceedings recognizing the

    petitioner as founder family member was cancelled in the year

    2000 and he sought for review the subject proceedings and the

    said review was dismissed in the year 2006 and hence the order of

    cancellation become final. Since then no express proceedings

    were issued recognizing the petitioner herein as founder family

    member. There are serious disputes between the petitioner and

    the respondents regarding recognition of founder family member

    and there are number of writ petitions filed by the petitioner herein

    for his declaration as founder family members and other matters in

    relation to 3rd respondent institution. Finally this Hon’ble Court in

    Writ Appeal No.847/2025 passed the following order:

    15. As far as allegations of financial mismanagement
    and other allegations relating to the functioning of the
    5th respondent-institution is concerned, it would not be
    appropriate for this Court to interdict any such
    investigation, as long as such investigation/enquiry is
    strictly in accordance with the provisions of the
    Endowments Act, 1987 and the Rules made thereunder.

    This Court has also been informed that the 3rd
    ::6::

    respondent has completed the enquiry and the report is
    presently before the Commissioner, Endowments. In
    such circumstances, the Commissioner Endowments,
    may consider the said report, to the extent of the
    allegations relating to mismanagement and
    misfeasance of the appellant and to initiate such
    enquiry, as may be permissible under the provisions of
    the Endowments Act, 1987, if any material is available,
    for taking such a course of action. Needless to say, any
    such enquiry, would be a denovo enquiry, in which the
    appellant shall be given an opportunity of hearing and
    an opportunity to set out his case.

    16. On the question of the status of the appellant as a
    member of the founder family, the only provision of the
    Endowments Act, 1987, where such an issue can be
    considered, is Section 87(h) of the Endowments Act,
    1987. Under this provision, all or any disputes relating to
    the status of a person, as a member of the founder
    family, of any religious or Charitable Institutions, can be
    decided only by the Endowment Tribunal. In such
    circumstances, the 2nd respondent or the 3rd respondent
    can at best approach the Endowment Tribunal for a
    decision on the status of the appellant as a member of
    the founder family of the 5th respondent-institution.

    Needless to say, even any person interested in the
    institution, may approach the Endowment Tribunal to
    give a quietus to this issue.”

    5. In view of the orders passed by Division Bench of this

    Hon’ble Court as extracted above, the fact remains that there are

    no express proceedings after 2006 recognizing the petitioner

    herein as founder family member of the 3rd respondent institution

    by the competent authority i.e., 2nd respondent herein. In the

    absence of such express proceedings, the claim of the petitioner

    as founder family member is subject to the result of the writ petition
    ::7::

    or otherwise the petitioner or the respondents shall approach the

    Endowment Tribunal as directed by this Hon’ble Court to resolve

    the dispute for recognition as founder family member. Therefore,

    this Court prima facie in the opinion that the Founder’s day as per

    the notification of the 43 Register should be conducted at 3rd

    respondent institution as per the date notified by the authorities

    concerned.

    6. Therefore, the Executive Officer of the 3rd Respondent or any

    other officer or committee duly appointed by the 2nd Respondent

    with the coordination of 3rd Respondent shall be conducted

    Founder’s day. All the interested persons including the petitioner

    can be participated in the proposed Founder’s Day Celebrations.

    Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 are directed to ensure proper law and

    order during the day of Founder’s Day celebrations at the 3rd

    Respondent institution.

    _________________________________
    VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J
    DT: 06.04.2026
    krk
    ::8::

    HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

    W.P.No.10135 of 2025

    DT: 06.04.2026

    krk



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here