V HARIHARA PRASAD Vs. K JAGANNA DHAN
LAWS(APH)-1955-2-24
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on February 10,1955

V.HARIHARA PRASAD Appellant
VERSUS
K.JAGANNA DHAN Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

MURARI LAL GUPTA NAND KISHORE VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-1965-9-14] [REFERRED TO]
PRINTERS HOUSE PRIVATE VS. MISRI LAL DALIP SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-1969-4-5] [REFERRED TO]
K SESHAGIRI MALLER VS. SPECIAL TEHSILDAR FOR LAND ACQUISITION KOZHIKODE [LAWS(KER)-1963-8-4] [REFERRED TO]
SREE JNANODAYA YOGAIN VS. PANKAJAKSHY [LAWS(KER)-1995-1-21] [REFERRED TO]
BHARAT BHAWAN NIRMAN SAHKARI SAMITI LTD VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-1978-11-1] [REFERRED TO]
MOTIYAN VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-1980-9-11] [REFERRED TO]
KOORA RAM VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-1972-1-52] [REFERRED]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)This is a petition under Art. of the Constitution for the the issue of a Writ of Prohibition on other appropriate Writ prohibiting respondent 2 (The State of Andhra, represented by the Collector, Guntur District) from acquiring and taking possession of the lands belonging to the petitioner or in the alternative for the issue of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the acquisition of the said lands by respondent 2 and quashing the proceedings therein.
(2.)The petitioner is the hereditary trusted of Sri Bhavanarayana Swami temple, Ponnur village in the Guntur District. Respondent I is one Kota Jagannadham. Respondent 2 is the State represented by the Collector of the Guntur District.
(3.)The facts which give rise to this Writ petition may be stated ; Sri Bhavanarayanaswamy temple, of which the petitioner is the trustee, owns various lands in and around Ponnur. About 10 years ago, respondent 1 started building a temple in the same village by the name of Sri Sahasralingeswaraswami temple. He raised money mostly by donations and subscriptions for the construction of the temple. In or about the year 1947, he (respondent 1) whished to acquire Ac. 3-18 cents of land belonging to Sri Bhavanarayanaswamy temple and for that purpose made a proposal to the petitioner offering to give in exchange wet lands of double the extent in the neighbouring village of Patchalatadiparu and this proposal was agreed to by the petitioner subject to the sanction of the Hindu Religious Endowments Board.The Proposal wa not however accepted by the Hindu Religious Endowments Board, whereupon respondent 1 on behalf of the Sahasralingeswaraswami Sangham, applied to the Government for acquisition of the lands by private negotiation for the temple. He was informed by the Government that the acquisition of land on behalf of private individuals was not provided for under the Land Acquisition Act. He was further informed on 21.1.1949 that the land could not be acquired as the Sangham was not a registered body and as it did not come within the definition of Company in S. 3 (e), Land Acquisition Act. The Sangham thereupon got itself registered under the Indian Companies Act and then applied for the acquisition of the lands required for the construction of the temple. The petitioner objected to the acquisition stating that the lands were very valuable. On a consideration of the objections so raised, the Government finally approved the draft notifications and the draft declaration and also directed that the articles in the Memorandum of the Association of the Sangham be suitably amended to make the temple, proposed to be constructed accessible to the Hindu public without distinction of caste or community.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.