Dr. P.T.G.V.Rangacharyulu, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,
WP/19443/2019 · 2025-07-03
Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 28417 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 28417 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010404472019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 19443/2019 Between:
1. DR.P.T.G.V.RANGACHARYULU, S/O.SATYANARAYANA CHARYULU, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/O SRI RANGAPURAM VILLAGE, PAMIDIKUMMALA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 2. G.S.V.S.N. ACHARYULU,, S/O G.V.JAGANNADHA CHARYULU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O H.NO.5-82, KRISHNA SAI RESIDENCY, POST OFFICE ROAD, GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA,
521225. 3. DR. S.T.G.V.RAGHAVA CHARYULU,, S/O VEERA RAGHAVA CHARYULU, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/O H.NO.20-8-8/A, FF2, AYODHYANAGAR, VIJAYAWADA 3. 4. PANCHANGAM,, YATI RAJA SRINIVAS, S/O P.NARASIMHA SWAMY, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O H.NO.501, NAVYA MEDOWS, SIVALAYAM STREET, 3RD LEFT CROSS, NEAR EMPLOYEES COLONY, PENAMALURU, VIJAYAWADA, 521137. ...PETITIONER(S) AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, A. P.
SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, GOLLAPUDI, IBRAHIMPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS, VIJAYAWADA. 5. SRI RANGANAYAKA SWAMY TEMPLE, SRIRANGAPURAM VILLAGE, PAMIDIMUKKALA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT, REP.BY ITS MANAGER. 6. SRI KODURI RANGA RAMANUJA CHARYULU, R/O.SRIRANGAPURAM VILLAGE, PAMIDIMUKKALA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S):
2
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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 5 in not concluding the proceedings in Rc.No.B2/ 25088/2016/ KRI/GVRM initiated against the 6th respondent for removing him from the post of Founder Family Member and the further action of the respondents 1 to 5 in not considering the petitioners' representation dated 16.4.2014, 26.6.2017 and 21.1.2019 submitted for removing the 6th respondent as founder family member and to recognise the petitioners as the founder family members of Sri Ranganayaka Swamy Temple, Srirangapuram Village, Pamidimukkala Mandal, Krishna District as illegal, violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and also contrary to the provisions of the A.P.Act 30/1987 and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 5 to remove the 6th respondent as Founder Family Member and recognize the petitioners as Founder Family Members
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. KOCHIRI RAJA SHEKAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.
VENKAT CHALLA
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
The instant Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioners seeking indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:
“ ... to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 5 in not concluding the proceedings in Rc.No.B2/ 25088/2016/KRI/GVRM initiated against the 6th respondent for removing him from the post of Founder Family Member and the further action of the respondents 1 to 5 in not considering the petitioners' representation dated 16.4.2014, 26.6.2017 and 21.1.2019 submitted for removing the 6th respondent as founder family member and to recognise the petitioners as the founder family members of Sri Ranganayaka Swamy Temple, Srirangapuram Village, Pamidimukkala Mandal, Krishna District as illegal, violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and also contrary to the provisions of the A.P.Act 30/1987 and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 5 to remove the 6th respondent as Founder Family Member and recognize the petitioners as Founder Family Members ...”
3
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the subject matter of this Writ Petition does not survive for adjudication and that the Writ Petition has become infructuous. 3. Learned Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for respondents is in attendance. 4. In that view, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/*
4
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Writ Petition No. 19443 of 2019
04.07.2025
Mjl /*