← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaWP/8021/2012disposed of no costs

Pamulapati Veeraiah, v. The Deputy Commissioner,

2015-03-12A.Rajasheker Reddy3 pages

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKHER REDDY WRIT PETITION No.8021 of 2012 Between:

Bossuluri Mangamma PETITIONER AND

1. The Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Guntur, Guntur District, and another.

RESPONDENTS

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed to declare the proceedings Rc.No.A4/6339/2011, dated 06.03.2012 issued by the 1st respondent constituting the trust board to the 2nd respondent-temple appointing respondents 3 to 5 as Chair Person and trustees of the Trust Board, as illegal and arbitrary.

When the writ petition is taken up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent-temple submits that since the term of Trust Board already expired by 6.03.2014, the official respondents are obligated to constitute a new trust board and while constituting the new trust board, the claim of the petitioners along with other eligible candidates can be taken into account for the purpose of constituting the trust board.

In the counter affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent it is admitted that the 3rd respondent filed O.A.No.98 of 2008 and on dismissal of the same on 20.06.2009 she filed A.S.No.335 of 2009. The said appeal was allowed on 09.03.2010 declaring the 3rd respondent herein as a member of the founder family of the 2nd respondent-temple. It is also admitted that against the order in appeal the 2nd respondent filed C.R.P.No.787 of 2012 and the same is pending. Since the term of the trust board expired, I deem it appropriate to direct respondents 1 and 2 to constitute a fresh Trust Board considering the claim of the petitioners herein as well as others, who are eligible, since the 3rd respondent is declared as founder family member of the 2nd respondent-temple by the IV Additional District Judge, Guntur, in A.S.No.335 of 2009. However, the claim of the 3rd respondent has to be considered for continuation of Chairman of the

Trust Board subject to the final orders in C.R.P. The C.R.P. has to be heard finally, as such, post the C.R.P.No.787 of 2012 "for hearing" after summer vacation.

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________________ A. RAJASHEKHER REDDY, J.

12th March, 2015 Js.