% f •4 H APHC010402422025 iN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT aMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 20905 OF 2025 Between: Kothakota Ananthacharyulu, S/o Late K.Laxmanacharyulu aged 52 years, Occ Upa Pradhana Archaka (Retired) R/o plot No 92, Bheemas Garden, Near SNAS Temple, kasapuram Village, Guntakal mandal, Anantapuram District 515803. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary Endowments Department. Secretariat, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The Commissioner, Endo\A^nt Department at Gollapudi, Vijayawada Andhra Pradesh. 521225 3. The Executive officer, Sri Nettikanti Anjaneya Swamy Devasthanam. Ka^uram,village Guntakal mandal, Ananthapuram District, Andhra Pradesh 515803 van ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of mandamus by declaring the action of the respondents respondent no 3 in not considering the orders of the 2'"'^ respondent vide more particularly R.C.No. D1/COE14026(51)/5/2025 dated 12.06.2025 to consider the petitioner representation requesting to recognizing^petitioners as hereditary trustee and submit a report enabling the 2nd r^pondent to take further action as illegal and arbitrary. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent no 3 to examine the petitioner’s representation requesting to recognize petitioner as hereditary trustee which was forwarded by respondent No 2 the Commissioner Endowments and submit a report to the 2nd respondent enabling the 2nd respondent to take further action and pass orders pending disposal of this Writ petition, in the interest of justice and equity. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K AMRITH RAJ Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following order: * APHC010402422025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] MONDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 20905/2025 Between: 1.KOTHAKOTA ANANTHACHARYULU, K.LAXMANACHARYULU AGED 52 YEARS, OCC UPA PRADHANA ARCHAKA (RETIRED) R/0 PLOT NO 92, BHEEMAS GARDEN, NEAR SNAS TEMPLE, KASAPURAM VILLAGE, GUNTAKAL MANDAL, ANANTAPURAM DISTRICT 515803. S/0 LATE ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT AT GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA ANDHRA PRADESH. 521225 3.THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SRI NETTIKANTI ANJANEYA SWAMY VARI DEVASTHANAM, KASAPURAM,VILLAGE GUNTAKAL MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 515803 ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a writ or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of mandamus by declaring the action of the respondents more particularly respondent no 3 in not considering the orders of the 2nd respondent vide R.C.No. D1/COE14026(51 )/5/2025 dated 12.06.2025 to consider the petitioner representation requesting to recognizing petitioners as hereditary trustee and submit a report enabling the 2nd respondent to take further action as illegal and arbitrary and to pass 2 lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the respondent no 3 to examine the petitioners representation requesting to recognize petitioner as hereditary trustee which was forwarded by respondent No 2 the Commissioner Endowments and submit a report to the 2nd respondent enabling the 2nd respondent to take further action and pass orders pending disposal of this Writ petition, in the interest of justice and equity and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KAMRITH RAJ Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following; ORDER:- Heard Sri K.Amrith Raj, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned for the Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments appearing 1®' and 2'^'^ respondents and Sri TVenu Gopal, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 3^'^ respondent. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is against the 3'"'^ respondent in respondent, vide It is contended that one Guduru Kothakota nd not forwarding the report as requested by the 2 proceedings dated 12.06.2025. Bhimacharyulu, and Anantacharyulu Kothakota Ramanujacharyulu were declared as hereditary trustees and archakas of Sri vide Kasapuram, Devasthanam Nettikanti Anjaneya Swamyvari proceedings dated 15.10.1969. The petitioner is from the family of Kothakota Anantacharyulu. 3 The Commissioner vide proceedings dated 02.12.2022 has recognised the petitioner and seven others as family members of hereditary 3. i archakas of the subject Temple. And directed the Executive Officer of the Temple to enter the name of the petitioner, and others as members of the hereditary archakas of Sri Nettikanti Anjaneya Swamy Temple, in the Register under Section 43(10) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (Act 30/1987). It is contended that the petitioner has made a representation to the 2"'^ respondent-commissioner to recognise him as hereditary trustee of 4. the Temple, stating that the other family members have no objection. Pursuant to the same, vide proceedings dated 12.06.2025, the 2'^'' respondent called for the report of the 3'^^ respondent-Executive Officer of the Temple. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the 3^*^ respondent- Executive Officer, did not submit any report in pursuance of the same, and the 2"'^ respondent is proposing to constitute a new Trust Board. It is contended that any such appointment without considering the request made by the petitioner would cause prejudice to the petitioner. Learned Government Pleader on instructions would submit that 5. the petitioner cannot be considered as hereditary trustee, Smt. K.Sugunamma is recognized as hereditary trustee vide proceedings in G.O.Ms.No.969, Revenue Endts-ll dated 18.09.2003. The present hereditary trustee of the Temple cannot be removed without assigning any reasons. The ancestors of Smt. K.Sugunamma namely Sri K.Garudacharyulu was declared as hereditary trustee of subject Temple in a Civil Suit in O.S.No.4 of 1930 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Anantapuram and the same was confirmed by the High Court of Madras in A.S.No.150 of 1934 Sri K.Garudacharyulu on 25.07.1938. After the death of his son Sri K.Ramanjacharyulu succeeded as hereditary trustee - cum - archaka and he was discharging his functions as hereditary trustee till he died in the year 2001. After his death, his daughter-in-law Smt.K. Sugunamma was recognized as hereditary trustee of the subject temple and she has been acting as such, as recognized hereditary trustee continuously. 6. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is also from the family of Kothakota Ananthacharylu, who is his grandfather, and was recognized as hereditary trustee in 1969 and his is also reflecting in the register that has been maintained under Section 43(10) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions Endowments Act, 1987(Act 30/1987). Having regard to the same, learned counsel for the petitioner argues that her appointment will not defeat the hereditary rights of the petitioner. Considered the submissions. Having regard to the contentions advanced, this Court is of the view that it is appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the 2"^^ respondent to pass appropriate orders pursuant to the representation the petitioner. Needless to observe that the 3"^ respondent-Executive Officer shall also submit his report to the 2'^^ respondent-Commissioner within three name and 7. 8. of 5 weeks from the date of the receipt after furnishing of the said report and the 2'^'^ respondent-commissioner shall pass appropriate orders within four (4) weeks thereafter. 9. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K.KASI RAO ACHARI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// // ^ SECTION DEPiCFR To 1. The Principal Secretary Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The Commissioner, Endowment Department at Gollapudi, Vijayawada Andhra Pradesh. 521225 3. The Executive officer, Sri Nettikanti Anjaneya Swamy vari Devasthanam, Kasapuram,village Guntakal mandal, Ananthapuram District, Andhra Pradesh 515803 4. One CC to Sri. K Amrith Raj, Advocate [OPUO 5. Two CCs to GP For Endowments, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 6. Two CD Copies. Endowments Department, Secretariat, AL HIGH COURT TL DATED: 18/08/2025 ORDER WP NO. 20905 OF 2025 I 16 SEP 2025 ' Current section , rn f>»h DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS