APHC010079262013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 16292/2013 Between: 1. PULLELA SATYA RAMALINGA SASTRY,, S/O SUBRAHMANYA SURYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, HINDU, R/O GANTAARI VEEDHI. MUMMIDIVARAM VILLAGE & MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF A P, REP BY ITS SECRETARY. CHARITABLE AND HINDU RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIT BUILDINGS, HYDERABAD. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, RAJAHNNUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT 4. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SRI BHADRAKALISAMYTHA VEERESHWARA SWAMY TEMPLE, MURAMALLA VILLAGE. I.POLAVARAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...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 to issue an appropriate Writ. Order or direction more particularly a Writ in the Nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd 2 respondent in not take any steps to conduct an enquiry in pursuance of the directions of the 2nd respondent vide Rc.H6/1722/2013 dated 20-04-2013 in respect of illegal Employees appointments in the 4th respondent Temple as illegal. Arbitrary, unreasonable, violation of provisions of the Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act and also violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14,16, and 21 of the Constitution of India IA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 19749 OF 2013 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 3rd respondent to take immediate Steps in pursuance of the directions of the 2nd respondent vide Rc.H6/1722/2013 dated 20-04-2013 pending disposal of the above Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. G SIMHADRI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. V T M PRASAD 2. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS 3. KANDA SRINIVASU SC FOR ENDOWMENTS (KS AND WG) The Court made the following: 3 Order:- Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive any further, as the respondents have completed the enquiry and passed subsequent orders. Hence, the matter has become infructuous. Recording the same, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 18.03.2026 SR