IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.NARENDAR AND

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

WRIT APPEAL NO: 930 OF 2024

Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 23.02.2024 passed in W.P.No.21176 of 2016 on the file of the High Court.

Between:

Sri Venkateswara Swamy Vari Devasthanam, Dwaraka Tirumala, West Godavari District, Rep. by its Regional Joint Commissioner and Executive Officer

...APPELLANT

AND

• 1. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, Now at Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District, A.P.
• 2. The District Collector, (Panchayat Raj wing) Eluru, West Godavari District.
• 3. The District Panchayat Officer, Eluru, West Godavari District
• 4. The Gram Panchayat, Rep.by its Panchayat Secretary, Dwaraka Tirumala Village, Dwarka Tirumala Mandal, West Godavari District.

...RESPONDENTS

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

Al Checkers.

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 grant stay of the proceedings in RoC.No.72/2016 dated 25.06.2016 issued by the 4 Respondent pending disposal of the above writ appeal.

IA NO: 3 OF 2024

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 suspend the operation of the Proceedings in RoC.No.72/2016 dated 25.06.2016 passed by the 4^th Respondent refusing to grant exemption to the Appellant Temple and demanding a sum of Rs.5,65,279/- towards Property Tax for the Assessment year 2015-2016 from the Petitioner Temple pending disposal of the above writ appeal.

Counsel for the Appellant(s): SRI V VENU GOPAL RAO, Sr Counsel for M/S PULIPATI RADHIKA

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 4: SRI Y KOTESWARA RAO

The Court made the following: ORDER

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.NARENDAR AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR

1

WRIT APPEAL No. 930 of 2024

JUDGMENT:- (per Hon'ble Sri Justice G.Narendar)

V

1. Heard Mr.V.Venu Gopal Rao, learned Senior Counsel along with Ms.Pulipati Radhika, learned Standing Counsel for the Appellant-Temple and learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj Department and Mr. A. Koteswar Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent No.4-Gram Panchayat.

This intra court Appeal is directed against the order of learned Single Judge, dated 23.02.2024 in W.P.No.21176 of 2. 2016. The short question that fell for consideration before the learned Single Judge was whether the building abutting the temple and providing accommodation to devotees visiting Sri. Venkateswara Swamy vari Devasthanam, would come within the definition of ^a residence or building fit for human occupation and be liable for imposition of House Tax under Section 61 of the Act?

3. The learned Single Judge after appreciating the various contentions and the law laid down by the Full Bench in the case of Abudaya Educational Society, Prakasam District v. Kanumalla Gram Panchayat, Prakasam District^ pleased to reject the Writ Petition. has been

4. The facts are not in dispute.

5. It is fairly submitted by the learned senior counsel that the Temple possesses such buildings, which are utilized for providing amenities to the visiting devotees and that the buildings neither utilized for any residential purpose or commercial purpose and then, he would submit that the order of the learned Single Judge upholding the imposition of tax, is erroneous. are

6. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent No.4 and the learned Government Pleader would vehemently contended that the buildings having been utilized for occupation of the devotees, the same falls within the ambit of sub-section (2),

2006 (6) ALD ¹ (FB)

2

'W

automatically qualifies for imposition of (19) of the Act and hence tax under Section 61 of the Act.

5

We have heard the learned counsels and having given our attention to the various contentions. The learned Single Judge, Writ Petition has been pleased to reserve 7. while rejecting the liberty to the Petitioner to seek for exemptipn from the approach the Respondent No.1 and ambit of the House Tax imposable find that the learned under Section ⁶¹ of the Act. That apart, we Single Judge has appreciated the right vested in the Respondent-Gram Panchayat to waive the imposition and collection of House Tax.

in that view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that the order of dismissal could be modified to be read as ■disposed of and further reserving liberty to the Petitioner to seek such redressal by way of representation seeking exemption from the imposition taxes. 8.

today shall stand affirmed and due with the period of four (04) weeks The demand for tax as shall deposit 50% of the sums on 9. the Appellant Respondent-Gram Panchayat, within a

3

from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order, subject to the condition that representation shall be submitted weeks from today. In the event, such within four (04) representation is made, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the Respondent No.1 within an outer limit of six (06) months from the date of receipt of the said representation.

4

TP

.J

10. In so far as the direction in para No.9 of the order in Writ Petition whereby, learned Single has disciplinary proceedings against the Respondent No. admitted by the learned Standing Counsel Pleader that on account of inadvertency, the fact amounts as per the interim order, dated 04.07.2016 has communicated to the Court and also the fact Appellant-Petitioner has deposited the with the interim direction. directed initiation of 4, it is fairly and Government of receipt of the not been remains that the amounts in compliance

11. In that view of the matter, the further disciplinary proceedings is hereby set-aside. direction to initiate

12. The Writ Appeal stands ordered accordingly. There shall no order as to costs. be As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any,

pending in this Writ Appeal shall stand closed.

//TRUE COPY//

Sd/- P.VENKATA RAMANA JOINT REGISTRAR

S^GTtON^FFlCER

To

r

y

• 1. The Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, Now at Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District, A.P.
• The District Collector, (Panchayat Raj wing) Eluru, West Godavari District. 2.
• The District Panchayat Officer, Eluru, West Godavari District 3.
• The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat, Dwaraka Tirumala Village, Dwarka Tirumala Mandal, West Godavari District.(By RPAD) 4.
• One CC to Sri. Pulipati Radhika, Advocate [OPUC] 5.
• Two CCs to GP For Panchayat Raj Rural Dev ,High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 6.

One CC to Sri Y Koteswara Rao, Advocate [OPUC]. 7.

Three CD Copies 8.

AL

HIGH COURT

DATED: 20/11/2024

ORDER

WA.No.930 of 2024

WITHREEL?

WRIT APPEAL IS ORDERED WITHOUT COSTS