APHC010509022006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3506] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 8911/2006 Between: 1. A.T. PARTHASARATHY DEEKSHITHULU & ANOTHER, R/O BHAVANI NAGAR, TIRUPATHI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT 2. A.SREENIVASA DEEKSHITHULU S/O SREENIVASA NARASIMHA, DEEKSHITHULU, R/O NO. 142, T.NAGAR, TIRUPATHI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. GTOVT OF AP REP BYSECY 7 OTHERS, REVENUE (ENDOWMENTS) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD 2. GOVERNMENT OF A P REPBY COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, TILAK ROAD, HYDERABAD 3. TIRUMALA TIRUPATHI DEVASTHANAMS, REP BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TIRUPATHI 4. TIRUMALA TIRUPATHI DEVASTHANAMS, REP BY ITS DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER, (TEMPLE), TIRUMALA. 5. SRI K VARADACHARY NOMINATED ARCKAKA TIRUMALA TEMPLE, TIRUMALA CHITTOOR, DISTRICT 6. SRI N NARASIMHACHARYU NOMINATED ARCHAKA, TIRUMALA TEMPLE, TIRUMALA, CHITTOR DISTRICT 7. A P RAMACHARYULU NOMINATED ARCHAKA TIRUMALA TEMPLE, TIRUMALA, AND ARCHAKA AT SRI KALYANA VENKATESWARA 2 CGR, J W.P.No.8911 of 2006 SWAMY TEMPLE, PUNGANUR, CHITTOR DISTRICT 8. A V KHADRI NARASIMHACHARYULU, NOMINATED ARCHAK, TIRUMALA TEMPLE, TIRUMALA AND ARCHAKA AT SRI KONETI RAJASWAMY DEVASTHANAMS, KEELAPATLA, GANGAVARAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR 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 a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or or direction, declaring the action of the respondnets3 and 4 in not complying with Section 35(3) and 35(4) of the A.P. Charitable & Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 as being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and also to declare the proceedings R.C. No.P-3/1802/Sr TM/TML/95, dt 6-7-1996 issued by the 4th respondent as being without jurisdiction, illegal and contrary to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court Reported in AIR 1996 SC 1765 s well as section 35 (3) and 35(4) of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious institutions and Endowments Act, 1987, and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. IA NO: 1 OF 2006(WPMP 11346 OF 2006 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 direct the respondent 3 and 4 to forthwith absorb archakas from the Families (1) tirupathamma Gari Family. (2) Paidipalli Family(3) Peddinti Family and (4) Gollapalli Familly who are hither to performing Archakathvam in the Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams, IA NO: 1 OF 2014(WPMP 47398 OF 2014 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 Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. J UGRANARASIMHA 3 CGR, J W.P.No.8911 of 2006 Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. M DORAI RAJ 2. K RAGHAVA CHARYULU 3. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS 4. C SRINIVASA BABA The Court made the following: 4 CGR, J W.P.No.8911 of 2006 ORDER: The Writ Petition is filed seeking following relief:- “…to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or or direction, declaring the action of the respondnets3 and 4 in not complying with Section 35(3) and 35(4) of the A.P. Charitable & Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 as being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and also to declare the proceedings R.C. No.P-3/1802/Sr TM/TML/95, dt 6-7-1996 issued by the 4th respondent as being without jurisdiction, illegal and contrary to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court Reported in AIR 1996 SC 1765 s well as section 35 (3) and 35(4) of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious institutions and Endowments Act, 1987, and pass such….” 2. Heard Sri. J. Ugranarasimha, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. C. Srinivasa Baba, learned counsel for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents states that by virtue of Interim Orders, dated 29.10.2008, the petitioners and also their next generation are being continued to discharge Archakathvam. 4. In that view of the matter, both learned counsels request that the writ petition can be disposed of in terms of Interim Order passed by this Court. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _______________________ CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J Date: 26.02.2026 PBS 5 CGR, J W.P.No.8911 of 2006 113 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 8911 of 2006 Date: 26.02.2026 PBS