Raja Yarlagadda Ankineedu Prasad, S/O Sivarama Prasad, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Its

The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.39768 of 2015 Dated 08.12.2015 Between:

Raja Yarlagadda Ankineedu Prasad ... Petitioner and The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Prl.Secretary, Revenue (Endowments) Dept., Hyderabad and 5 others

...Respondents

Counsel for the petitioner: Mr.Subba Reddy.S Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP for Endowments (AP) The Court made the following:

O r d e r :

The proceeding in Rc.No.V1/40866/2012, dated 20.11.2015, of respondent No.2, whereby he has directed payment of subsistence allowance to respondent No.6 during his suspension period from the funds of respondent No.4- Temple, is questioned in this Writ Petition.

It is the pleaded case of the petitioner that his

fore-fathers have founded respondent No.4- Temple, which is attached to respondent No.5- Institution, and that respondent No.6, who was the regular employee of respondent No.5, was kept in charge of the management of the said Temple. The petitioner further pleaded that the income of respondent No.4Temple is not sufficient to meet the expenditure towards the subsistence allowance payable to respondent No.6.

Mr.S.Subba Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the application filed by the petitioner for recognising him as the member of the founder family of respondent No.4- Temple is still pending before the competent authority.

In my opinion, the petitioner has no locus standi to maintain this Writ Petition for the reason that so far, his status as the member of the founder family of respondent No.4- Temple has not been recognised. Unless he is recognized as the member of the founder family, he cannot espouse the cause of respondent No.4 merely because he happens to be a devotee and performs his daily rituals in the said Temple as claimed by him.

On this short ground alone, this Writ Petition is dismissed.

As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.51326 of 2015, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) Dt: 8th December, 2015 LUR