IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI i (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE ^ V MSM)}. PRESENT HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 22287 OF 2020 X Between: Dasu Shayamu, S/o. late Prasad Rao, Aged 40 years, Occ: Asadi, Sri Pydamma Ammavari Devasthanam, Pedana (V) and (M), Krishna District. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Endowments) Department, Secretariat, Velgapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Commissioner, Endowments Department, Gollapudi, Vijayawada Krishna District. 3. Sri Pydamma Ammavari Devasthanam, Pedana (V) AND District., Rep. By its Executive Officer 4. Dasu Vayunanda Rao, S/o. late Prasad Rao, Aged 56 years Occ- Transport, R/o.Pedana (V)86 (M), Krishna District. 5. Dasu Leela Prakaash, S/o. late Prasad Rao, Driver, R/o.Pedana (V) Aj^M), Krishna District. 6. The Deputy Commissioner, Endowments Department, Kakinda East Godavari. (M), Krishna Aged 50 years, Occ- ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order may; or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.2 in issuing the impugned proceedings in RC.No.A1 / 1 iP26(43)/35/2020 dated 04-11-2020 declaring the archakatvam rights of the Respondent No.4 and 5 as bad, illegal, without jurisdiction, without application of mind, abuse of power, void, violative of principles of natural justice. Violative of provision of Section 87(1 )(e) of The Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act 1987 and being violative of Articles 14, 16, 21, 25 and 300 A of constitution of India and consequentially set aside the same and direct the respondents not to interfere with the asadee/archakatvam rights of the petitioner till the rights of the respondent NO.4 and 5 are decided by the Andhra Pradesh Endowments Tribunal, At Peddakakni. one lA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 forth with pay the arrears of salaries from the month of September'2019 to September'2020. lA NO: 2 OF 2020 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 suspend the operation of the impugned proceedings in RC.No.AI/11026(43)735/2020 dated 04-11-2020 respondents not to interfere with the archaktvam services of the petitioner in the 3rd respondent temple. and direct the lA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 respondents 3 to 6 to allow the petitioner to perform hereditary archakatvam services in the 3rd respondent temple due from 1st September 2021 to 31st August 2022 towards his turn. lA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 respondents not to interfere with the customary practice of Neivedhyam by me during the Thota Family Asaadeship and to Rs.5,000/- towards Paditharam to me. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI D V SASIDHAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 6: GP FOR SERVICES II RADHIKA (SC FOR Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 4 & 5: SRI RAJESH KUMAR G The Court made the following: ORDER Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SMT. PULIPATI ENDOWMENTS) 1 APHC010336522020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 22287/2020 Between: Dasu Shayamu, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.D VSASIDHAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.KMADHAVA REDDY 2.PULIPATI RADHIKA , 3.RAJESH KUMAR G 4.GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-ll, appearing for the respondents. 2 2. It is contended that the archakatvam and management of the respondent is being performed by the members of two families namely one Thota' family and 'Dasu' family, their services were recognized and in lieu of their services rendered, the petitioners were paid remuneration on consolidated pay. Later the benefits of Pay Revision of 2005 were granted. 3. It is stated that after the death of the petitioner's father, the V and 5 respondents have created a fake document and with the help of the same, tried to interfere with the temple activities claiming right in the archakatvam. Against the said acts, the petitioner has made a representation to the 6*'' respondent on 31.05.2020. Thereafter, the 2"^^ respondent issued impugned proceedings dated 04.11.2020 recognizing the right of the 4“" and 5*^ respondent in performing archakatvam. Against the same, instant Writ Petition is filed. 4. Considered the rival submissions. 5. Against the order impugned in the Writ Petition, there i alternative remedy of appeal to the Tribunal Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu IS an under Section 87 of the Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987. In view of the same, this Court is of the view that the petitioner shall approach the Tribunal constituted under the Act. 3 6. . The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner requests this Court to continue the interim arrangement made during the pendency of the Writ Petition till the disposal of the appeal by the Tribunal, this Court is of the view that such an application has to be filed by the petitioner before the Tribunal, pending disposal of the appeal. I The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of, directing the petitioner to approach the Tribunal, against the order impugned within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of the order. Till filing of an interlocutory application by the petitioner for an interim arrangement, regarding the conduct of archakatvam, during the pendency of the case before the Tribunal, the interim arrangement made in the Writ Petition will 7. continue. The learned counsel appearing for the unofficial respondents r submits that priority should be given to the eldest member of the family. However, this submission was already considered when the interim order 8. was passed. Since the interim order was granted after taking this submission into account, the same cannot be reconsidered at this stage. The unofficial respondents are at liberty to raise the same before the Tribunal, if advised. 4 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shgll be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. Sd/- K KASIRAO ACHARI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// rsKT, OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue (Endowments) Department, Secretariat, Velgapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Commissioner, Endowments Department, Gollapudi, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 3. The Executive Officer, Sri Pydamma Ammavari Devasthanam, Pedana (V) AND, (M), Krishna District., Rep. By its 4. The Deputy Commissioner, Endowments Department, Kakinda, East Godavari. 5. One CC to Sri D V Sasidhar Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to Smt. Pulipati Radhika, SC for Endowments, Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to Sri Rajesh Kumar G, Advocate [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP for Services II, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 9. Three CD Copies TF HIGH COURT DATED;21/03/2025 ORDER WP.No.22287 of 2020 2 7 JUN 2025 >QuiT^tS«CtiO|lXC' Co disposing of the W.P., WITHOUT COSTS