EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TTD, TIRUPATI versus A.S. NARAYAN DEEKSHITULU AND ORS.

Citation: [1997] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 369 · Decided: 09-05-1997 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY · Disposal: Disposed off
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TTD, TIRUPATI 
v. 
A.S. NARAYAN DEEKSHITULU AND ORS. 
MAY 9, 1997 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND D.P. WADHWA, JJ.] 
Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and En-
dowments Act, 1987 : 
A 
B 
Thirumala Tirnpati Devasthanams-Archakas and other of-
C 
ficers-Abolition of heredita1y right to appointment-Payments made to Ar-
chakas and other officers-Application by TTD for recovery of excess 
payment-Direction by Supreme Court to Additional District Judge, Tirnpati 
to appoint a Commissioner for perusal of accounts and detennination of 
respective entitlements. 
D 
While upholding the constitutional validity of various provisions of 
Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endow-
ments Act, 1987 this Court held that abolition of hereditary rights of ar-
chakas and other office holders was not unconstitutional. * The Executive 
Officer of the Thirumala Tirupati Devasthanams was also permitted to work 
out the payments made to the archakas and other officers. The present ap· E 
plication has been filed by him stating that they have received more than 
what was due to them. Consequently he sought (i) directions for refund of 
amount paid to archakas, gamekars, jeeyamgars and other mirasidars as 
well as rendering of account of offerings received by them; (ii) directions to 
Additional District Judge, Tirupati to credit the cash securities furnished by F 
gamekars to TTD account and; (iii) orders directing archakas to refund 
cash to TTD equal to the immovable property securities furnished by them. 
Disposing the application, this Court 
HELD : This matter cannot be dealt with adequately unless accounts G 
are perused and respective entitlements are determined. Therefore the ap-
propriate course would be that the Additional District Judge, Tirupati 
should appoint an Advocate as Commissioner. TTD shall place all the 
records relating to the payments made to various persons before the Advo-
cate-Commissioner. The Commissioner shall give notice to all the 
mirasidars and gamekars and assess their respective entitlements and the H 
369 
370 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997) SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 
A liabilities. The report shall be placed before the Additional District Judge 
who before accepting the report of the Commissioner, would also give notice 
to all the persons to appear before him and after hearing their objections, if 
any, pass the order of r~fund, if any, to be made by the respective 
mirasidars/gamekars. In case the amount to be refunded is substantial and 
in case the mirasidars/gamekars are not seeking any appointment under the 
B service of the petitioner, after realising the amounts from the security fur-
nished by them, the balance amount shall be recovered as if it is a decree 
passed by this Court and the same may be realised in accordance with the 
procedure prescribed for execution of the decrees in Order XXI, CPC. In 
case the archakas/gamekars should seek appointment in the service of the 
C petitioner and in case they do not possess any substantial immovable 
property, the same may be recovered in easy instalments from part of the 
emoluments payable to them. (373-A-G] 
D 
E 
*A.S. Narayana Deekshitulu v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors., [1996] 9 
sec 548, referred to. 
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : 
I.A. No. 12 
IN 
Writ Petition (C) No. 638 of 1987 
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.) 
D.D. Thakur, P.P. Rao, Hardev Singh, Dr. Gauri Shankar, C. 
p 
Mukund, T.V. Ratnam, B. Kanta Rao, K. Ram Kumar, C. 
Balasubramaniam, Mrs. Asha Nair, V. Balaji, N. Ganpathy, A.T.M. Sam-
path, Ms. Madhu Moolchandani, S. Markandeya, Mrs. Chitra Markandeya, 
Ms. Meenakshi Aggarwal, A. Subba Rao, A.D.N. Rao, V. Balachandran, 
Jain Hansaria & Co., P.N. Ramalingam, 8. Parthasarthy, Y.P. Rao, Ms. 
Sadhana Ramachandran, Ms. 8. Sunita Rao and Ms. H. Wahi, for the 
G appearing parties. 
The Judgment of the Court was deiivered by 
K. RAMASWAMY, J. I.A. No. 12/97 in Writ Petition No. 638/87 has 
been filed by the TTD Executive Officer, Tirupati for the following direc-
H tions: 
EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TID, TIRUPATI v, AS.N. DEEKSHITIJLU [K RAMASWAMY, J.] 371 
"(a) To direct Archakas, Gamekars, Jeeyamgars and other A 
Mirasidars to refund the amount paid to them besides rendering 
account of the offerings both in cash and kind the value thereof 
received by them as their remuneration, salary and perquisites, to 
the Executive Officer, T.T.D. Devasthanams. 
(b) To direct the Additional Dis
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.