As per case facts, the Petitioner claimed possession of land under a Budhan Patta granted in 1970 and had been cultivating mango groves while paying rents. The Petitioner challenged a ... public auction announced by the Respondent temple for the same land, alleging it was done without proper enquiry, notice, or adherence to the relevant Act. The Respondent denied the claim, asserting temple ownership since 1957, arguing the Patta was false, and that the auction was a legitimate attempt to generate income for daily rituals. The question arose whether the Writ Petition was maintainable given the serious dispute over land title and the existence of a specific legal recourse. Finally, the Court found a serious dispute over land title, which falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Endowments Tribunal as per the Endowments Act. Since the Petitioner had not approached the Tribunal, the Writ Petition under Article 226 was not maintainable. However, the Court directed the Petitioner to approach the Endowments Tribunal within four weeks, and the Tribunal was instructed to protect the Petitioner's interest until the interlocutory application was disposed of, with respondents barred from taking coercive action.