APHC010250722024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 12491 of Between: R V Ramana Murthi The State of Andhra Pradesh and Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Srinivasulu P Counsel for the Respondent 1. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following order Challenging the action of the respondents in dispossessing the petitioner from the premisis of Dattatreya Devasthanam by enter into Datta Jyothishyalam in Sri Dattatreya Swami Devastanam, Rajaji Veedhi, Paatavuru, Anathapuram without issuing any notice, th filed. 2. Heard Sri P.Srinivasulu Standing Counsel for Endowments IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 12491 of 2024 ... AND f Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following order: Challenging the action of the respondents in dispossessing the petitioner from the premisis of Dattatreya Devasthanam by enter into Datta Jyothishyalam in Sri Dattatreya Swami Devastanam, Rajaji Veedhi, Paatavuru, Anathapuram without issuing any notice, the present writ petition is P.Srinivasulu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Endowments appearing for the 3rd respondent. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3458] THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA ...Petitioner Respondents Challenging the action of the respondents in dispossessing the petitioner from the premisis of Dattatreya Devasthanam by enter into Datta Jyothishyalam in Sri Dattatreya Swami Devastanam, Rajaji Veedhi, e present writ petition is and learned respondent. 3. The contention of the petitioner is that, he is practicing astrology, the 3rd respondent has permitted the petitioner to use the premises and he has been paying monthly rentals of Rs. 3,500/- to the 3rd respondent. The temple authorities have also acknowledged receipt of the said amount. However, the petitioner claims that the pujari has subjected him to harassment. Bringing this to the notice of the respondents, the petitioner has already filed a representation before the Executive Officer/3rd respondent on 25.03.2024, but the representation has not yet been disposed of. 4. When the matter was taken up for admission, the learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent submitted that the said representation does not appear to have been received by the 3rd respondent. 5. In light of this, the petitioner is permitted to file a fresh representation before the 3rd respondent, bringing to their notice the alleged misconduct of the pujari/archakas. Upon filing of the said representation, the 3rd respondent is directed to dispose of the representation within a period of six weeks, providing an opportunity for hearing to the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. __________________________________ SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date: 07.04.2025 BSK 43 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 12491 of 2024 Date: 07.04.2025 BSK