{"id":16637,"date":"1996-02-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1996-02-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996"},"modified":"2016-05-06T12:53:29","modified_gmt":"2016-05-06T07:23:29","slug":"pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996","title":{"rendered":"Pavani Sridhara Rao vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh &amp; Ors on 29 February, 1996"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Pavani Sridhara Rao vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh &amp; Ors on 29 February, 1996<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1996 AIR 1334, \t\t  JT 1996 (3)\t430<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: M S.B.<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Majmudar S.B. (J)<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nPAVANI SRIDHARA RAO.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nGOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH &amp; ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t29\/02\/1996\n\nBENCH:\nMAJMUDAR S.B. (J)\nBENCH:\nMAJMUDAR S.B. (J)\nBHARUCHA S.P. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1996 AIR 1334\t\t  JT 1996 (3)\t430\n 1996 SCALE  (2)705\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>\t\t      J U D G M E N T<br \/>\nS.B. Majmudar, J:\n<\/p>\n<p>     These two\tappeals by  special leave have been moved by<br \/>\nthe common  appellant against  the judgment and order of the<br \/>\nDivision Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court by which the<br \/>\nDivision Bench\tdismissed one  writ appeal  and another writ<br \/>\npetition moved\tby the\tappellant before the High Court. The<br \/>\nGovernment of  Andhra Pradesh;\tthe  Commissioner  of  Hindu<br \/>\nReligious and Charitable Endowments, Hyderabad; the Deputy<br \/>\nCommissioner  of   Endowments,\tGuntur\t and  the  Assistant<br \/>\nCommissioner of\t Endowments, Ongole,  Prakasam District, are<br \/>\nthe common  respondents in  these appeals.  A  few  relevant<br \/>\nfacts are required to be noted to highlight the grievance of<br \/>\nthe appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The appellant filed Writ Petition No.531 of 1980 before<br \/>\nthe Andhra  Pradesh High Court being aggrieved by Memorandum<br \/>\ndated 30.12.1978  issued by  Respondent No. 1, Government of<br \/>\nAndhra\tPradesh,   represented\tby  its\t Secretary,  Revenue<br \/>\n(Endowments) Department\t by which the order dated 30.05.1978<br \/>\npassed by  Respondent No.2,  Commissioner of Hindu Religious<br \/>\nand Charitable Endowments, was confirmed. That writ petition<br \/>\ncame to\t be dismissed  by  the\tlearned\t Single\t Judge.\t The<br \/>\nappellant carried  the matter  in appeal which was dismissed<br \/>\nby the\timpugned judgment.  The facts  leading to  the\tsaid<br \/>\npetition are  that a saintly person named Tummala Venugopala<br \/>\nSwamy came to the village of the appellant and expressed his<br \/>\ndesire\tto   engage  himself  in  peaceful  meditation.\t The<br \/>\nappellant gave\thim a  site and constructed an Ashram in the<br \/>\nland belonging\tto him\tbeing Survey  No.201 of Mogilicherla<br \/>\nVillage. The  Ashram was  constructed out  of  the  donation<br \/>\nreceived from  one B.  China  Meera  Setty.  On\t 06.05.1976,<br \/>\nVenugopala Swamy  passed away.\tA Samadhi was constructed in<br \/>\nthe place  of Ashram  which became  a centre for pilgrimage.<br \/>\nThis Ashram  was known\tas Sri\tDattatreya Swamy Mandiram. A<br \/>\ntotal area of three acres of land was dedicated for the said<br \/>\npurpose by the appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Respondent\t No.2\tpassed\tan  order  dated  30.05.1978<br \/>\nappointing an  Executive  Officer  for\tthis  Mandiram.\t The<br \/>\nappellant being\t aggrieved by  the said\t order\tpreferred  a<br \/>\nrevision before\t the Government\t which\twas  dismissed.\t The<br \/>\nappellant then filed Writ Petition No.531 of 1980 before the<br \/>\nAndhra Pradesh\tHigh Court.  As noted  earlier, the  learned<br \/>\nSingle Judge  dismissed the  writ petition.  Thereafter, the<br \/>\nappellant filed\t a writ\t appeal before the Division Bench of<br \/>\nthe High Court. In the meantime, an order was passed in 1987<br \/>\nprecisely on  29.06.1987 by  Respondent No.4,  the Assistant<br \/>\nCommissioner of\t Endowments, Ongole,  after the dismissal of<br \/>\nthe writ  petition by  the learned Single Judge. By the said<br \/>\norder of  29.06.1987 which was a consequential order flowing<br \/>\nfrom the  earlier order\t of 30.05.1978 the Executive Officer<br \/>\nof the temple was invited to immediately take over charge of<br \/>\nthe temple from the appellant de facto managing trustee. The<br \/>\nappellant, therefore,  challenged the  said order  by filing<br \/>\nthe writ petition being Writ Petition No.10016 of 1987. That<br \/>\nwas clubbed with the pending aforesaid writ appeal. Both the<br \/>\nwrit petition  and the\twrit appeal  were dismissed  by\t the<br \/>\nDivision Bench of the High Court by its impugned judgment.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The Division  Bench of  the High  Court in the impugned<br \/>\njudgment took  the view\t that  the  earlier  order  of\t1978<br \/>\ncontinued to  operate  despite\tthe  repeal  of\t the  Andhra<br \/>\nPradesh Charitable  and\t Hindu\tReligious  Institutions\t and<br \/>\nEndowments Act,\t 1966 (in  short `1966\tAct&#8217;) by  the latter<br \/>\n1987 Act  bearing the  very same caption. The High Court did<br \/>\nnot consider the main grievance of the appellant against the<br \/>\norder of  1978, namely,\t that it  was passed  without  there<br \/>\nbeing any  basis for  passing such  an order.  The  Division<br \/>\nBench of  the High Court, as noted above, dismissed both the<br \/>\nwrit appeal and the writ petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Learned counsel  for the appellant vehemently contended<br \/>\nthat leaving aside the question whether the earlier order of<br \/>\n1978 survived  after the enactment of 1987 Act replacing the<br \/>\nearlier Act,  even for\tpassing such order of 1978 there was<br \/>\nno material  with the  respondent-authorities and  the order<br \/>\nwas passed  without application\t of mind  and was  null\t and<br \/>\nvoid. It appears that this argument was not canvassed before<br \/>\nthe High  Court firstly at the stage of writ petition before<br \/>\nthe learned  Single Judge  nor in  writ appeal.\t However, as<br \/>\nthis question  goes to\tthe root  of the  matter,  we  heard<br \/>\nlearned counsel\t for both  the sides  on this  question. The<br \/>\nimpugned order\tat  page  23  of  the  paper-book  is  dated<br \/>\n30.05.1978. It\twas passed  with reference  to a  memorandum<br \/>\ndated  14.04.1978  issued  by  the  Assistant  Commissioner,<br \/>\nEndowments Department, Ongole. The impugned order was passed<br \/>\nin the\tlight of  the aforesaid Memorandum dated 14.04.1978.<br \/>\nThe relevant recitals therein read as under :-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t  &#8220;In the circumstances reported<br \/>\n     by\t the   Assistant   Commissioner,<br \/>\n     Endowments Department,  Ongole, and<br \/>\n     in the  interests of public service<br \/>\n     and for  the better  management  of<br \/>\n     the  Institution,\t the   Executive<br \/>\n     Officer of\t Temples, Malakonda,  is<br \/>\n     appointed as  Manager in additional<br \/>\n     charge to\tSri Dattatraya Mandiram,<br \/>\n     Mongilicherla  (Village),\tKandukur<br \/>\n     Tq., Prakasam District.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<pre>\n\t  The\tManager\t  appointed   is\n     directed  to   take  over\tcomplete\n     charge   of    records,   accounts,\n     moveable and  immoveable properties\n     etc.,    from     the     executive\n     authorities    of\t  the\t Subject\n     Institution.\"\n<\/pre>\n<blockquote><p>A mere\tlook at\t these recitals shows that only on the basis<br \/>\nof Memorandum  dated  14.04.1978  passed  by  the  Assistant<br \/>\nCommissioner, endowments  Department, Ongole, the said order<br \/>\nwas passed.  We wanted\tto know from the learned counsel for<br \/>\nthe respondents whether there was anything on record to show<br \/>\nthat at the relevant time the temple was mismanaged or there<br \/>\nwas any reason for invoking the power under the 1966 Act for<br \/>\npassing the  impugned order.  We also wanted to know whether<br \/>\nthe Memorandum dated 14.04.1978 issued from the Assistant<br \/>\nCommissioner&#8217;s Office  was on  record. He fairly stated that<br \/>\nthere was  no such  evidence on\t record. In this view of the<br \/>\nmatter, the conclusion is inevitable that the impugned order<br \/>\nwas passed  without  application  of  mind  there  being  no<br \/>\nfactual basis for invoking the jurisdiction of the competent<br \/>\nauthority under\t Section 27  of the 1966 Act under which the<br \/>\nimpugned order\tcame to\t be passed on 30.05.1978. It is true<br \/>\nthat at\t the relevant  time the\t annual income of the temple<br \/>\nwas not less than Rs.10,000\/- and did not exceed Rs.2 lakhs.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>It is  also true  that as per sub-section 2(a) of Section 27<br \/>\nof 1966\t Act, it was provided that in case of any charitable<br \/>\nor religious  institution or  endowment, whose annual income<br \/>\nwas not less than Rs.10,000\/- but did not exceed Rs.2 lakhs,<br \/>\nthe Commissioner  could appoint\t an  Executive\tOfficer\t for<br \/>\ndischarging the\t duties of such institution or endowment for<br \/>\nexercising the\tpowers and  discharging the duties conferred<br \/>\non him\tby or  under that Act. However, that power had to be<br \/>\nexercised on  relevant\tdata  and  on  necessary  facts\t and<br \/>\nmaterial. It  could not\t be exercised  just offhand  without<br \/>\nthere  being  any  necessity  for  appointing  an  Executive<br \/>\nOfficer for  the temple in public interest. Nothing could be<br \/>\npointed out  from the  record of  this case  by the  learned<br \/>\ncounsel for  the respondents  as to  why  i  f\twas  in\t the<br \/>\ninterest  of   public  and  for\t better\t management  of\t the<br \/>\ninstitution, that  an Executive\t Officer was to be appointed<br \/>\nin 1978.  Only\ton  this  short\t ground\t these\tappeals\t are<br \/>\nrequired to  be allowed. The impugned order dated 30.05.1978<br \/>\nwill stand  quashed and\t set aside.  We do  not express\t any<br \/>\nopinion on the finding of the High Court that the said order<br \/>\nremained operative  even after\tthe 1987  Act. We  keep that<br \/>\nquestion  open.\t  So  far  as  the  subsequent\torder  dated<br \/>\n29.06.1987 is concerned, a mere look at the said order shows<br \/>\nthat it\t was solely  based on the order dated 30.05.1978 and<br \/>\nwas passed  consequent on the dismissal of the writ petition<br \/>\nby the learned Single Judge of the High Court on 18.02.1987.<br \/>\nIt is  not an  independent order  issued under the 1987 Act.<br \/>\nOnce the  main order  of 30.05.1978 fails, the consequential<br \/>\norder necessarily must give way and must also fall with it.\n<\/p>\n<p>     In the  result, these  appeals are\t allowed.  Both\t the<br \/>\nimpugned  orders  i.e.\torder  dated  30.05.1978  issued  by<br \/>\nRespondent No.2\t and the  order dated  29.06.198? issued  by<br \/>\nRespondent No.4 are quashed and set aside. The common orders<br \/>\nof the\tDivision Bench of the High Court are set aside. Writ<br \/>\nAppeal No.456  of 1987\tand Writ  Petition No.10016  of 1987<br \/>\nwill stand allowed.\n<\/p>\n<p>     However,  we  may\tnote  one  contention  canvassed  by<br \/>\nlearned counsel\t for the  respondents. He  submitted that by<br \/>\nsubsequent order  dated 29.03.1979,  Respondent No.3, Deputy<br \/>\nCommissioner, Endowments  Department, Guntur,  had appointed<br \/>\nthe appellant  as hereditary trustee of the Ashram, that the<br \/>\nsaid order  did not  survive after the 1987 Act as office of<br \/>\nthe hereditary\ttrustee was  abolished by  this Act and that<br \/>\nthe 1987  Act was  upheld by  this  Court  in  the  case  of<br \/>\nPannalal Bankilal  &amp; Ors. etc. vs. State of andhra Pradesh &amp;<br \/>\nAnr .  (1996 (1)  Scale 405). In our view this aspect is not<br \/>\nmuch relevant  at this stage. We are concerned here with the<br \/>\nlegality of the 1978 order. Even if the office of hereditary<br \/>\ntrustee was  abolished by  the 1987  Act, the same could not<br \/>\nretrospectively validate  the 1978 order, It would of course<br \/>\nbe open\t to the respondents to pass appropriate orders under<br \/>\nthe  1987  Act\tin  accordance\twith  law,  so\tfar  as\t the<br \/>\nfunctioning of\tthe present temple is concerned. Exercise of<br \/>\nthat power  on the  part of  the respondents will not in any<br \/>\nway stand  affected  by\t the  present  proceedings  and\t the<br \/>\ndecision rendered by us herein. If and when such an order is<br \/>\npassed under  the 1987\tAct, it\t will equally by open to the<br \/>\nappellant to challenge it in accordance with law.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Subject to\t the aforesaid clarifications, these appeals<br \/>\nare allowed.  In the  facts and\t circumstances of  the case,<br \/>\nthere will be no order as to costs throughout.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Pavani Sridhara Rao vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh &amp; Ors on 29 February, 1996 Equivalent citations: 1996 AIR 1334, JT 1996 (3) 430 Author: M S.B. Bench: Majmudar S.B. (J) PETITIONER: PAVANI SRIDHARA RAO. Vs. RESPONDENT: GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH &amp; ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 29\/02\/1996 BENCH: MAJMUDAR S.B. (J) BENCH: [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-16637","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Pavani Sridhara Rao vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh &amp; Ors on 29 February, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Pavani Sridhara Rao vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh &amp; Ors on 29 February, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1996-02-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-06T07:23:29+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Pavani Sridhara Rao vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh &amp; Ors on 29 February, 1996\",\"datePublished\":\"1996-02-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-06T07:23:29+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996\"},\"wordCount\":1591,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996\",\"name\":\"Pavani Sridhara Rao vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh &amp; Ors on 29 February, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1996-02-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-06T07:23:29+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Pavani Sridhara Rao vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh &amp; Ors on 29 February, 1996\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Pavani Sridhara Rao vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh &amp; Ors on 29 February, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Pavani Sridhara Rao vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh &amp; Ors on 29 February, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1996-02-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-06T07:23:29+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Pavani Sridhara Rao vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh &amp; Ors on 29 February, 1996","datePublished":"1996-02-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-06T07:23:29+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996"},"wordCount":1591,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996","name":"Pavani Sridhara Rao vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh &amp; Ors on 29 February, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1996-02-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-06T07:23:29+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pavani-sridhara-rao-vs-government-of-andhra-pradesh-ors-on-29-february-1996#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Pavani Sridhara Rao vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh &amp; Ors on 29 February, 1996"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16637","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=16637"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16637\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=16637"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=16637"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=16637"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}