Hyderabad: The Telangana high court refused to stay a public auction proposed by the endowments department for leasing over 15 acres of temple land belonging to the Sri Raja Rajeshwara Swamy Temple in Donabanda village of Mancherial district, observing that it found no reason to interfere with the auction process at this stage.Justice GM Mohiuddin passed the direction recently while hearing a petition filed by Polasa Srisailam, challenging the auction notification issued for granting cultivation rights over the temple land for a one-year period starting June 1. The petitioner contended that his family built the temple more than a century ago and that he inherited both trusteeship and archaka rights. He argued that the mandal in charge and the executive officer had no authority to conduct the auction, as no regular EO had been appointed for the temple.He also relied on a certificate issued by the endowments department in 2010 under the Endowments Act, claiming that it recognised his rights over the land and temple affairs. “The proposed auction by the authorities is arbitrary and illegal and would deprive me of my livelihood, as I have been cultivating the land to perform temple rituals,” the petitioner claimed, while seeking suspension of the auction notice. He stated that failure to stop the process would cause irreparable loss to both him and the temple.Countering the claims, the standing counsel for the endowments department submitted that the certificate issued under Section 43 of the Act merely recorded existing particulars and did not grant hereditary or tenancy rights. The counsel argued that temple properties are legally vested with the deity and institution, and that an archaka could not claim ownership rights over the land.The govt also maintained that a public auction was necessary to ensure transparency and generate maximum revenue for the temple’s maintenance and upkeep. It further argued that the petitioner had an alternative remedy available under the Endowments Act. Taking note of the submissions, the judge observed that “the auction was only for granting tenancy rights for one year and not for the sale of the property.”While declining interim relief, the court permitted the petitioner to participate in the auction process if he wished to continue cultivation of the land, and posted the matter to June 12 for further hearing.
