APHC010726492015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 4034/2015 Between: 1. SRIPATHI PANDITHARADHYULA AGASTHYA LINGAM, S/O LATE LINGA, MURTHY, RESIDENT OF EMANI VILLAGE, DUGGIRALA MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REPRESENTED BY, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (ENDOWMENTS) SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD. 2. COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENT GOVERNMENT OF, A.P., TILAK ROAD, HYDERABAD. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT GUNTUR, - 4. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, GUNTUR 5. SRI AGASTHEESWARA SWAMY DEVASTHANAM, EMANI VILLAGE, DUGGIRALA MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER ...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 toto issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature 2 of a writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in handing over the complete charge as Trustee of Sri Agastheeswara Swamy Devasthanam, Emani Village, Duggirala Mandal, Guntur District and of the specific endowment attached to the said Devasthanam temple is arbitrary, illegal, unjust and unsustainable apart from being in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution India apart from being in violation of the Statutory provisions of the A.P. Hindu Charitable and Religious Endowments Act, 1987 (Act 30 of 1987) and the principles of natural justice and fair play and consequently direct the respondents to hand over the charge as Trustee of Sri Agastheeswara Swaxny Devasthanam, Emani Village, Duggirala Mandal, Guntur District and of the specific endowment attached to the said Devasthanam temple to the petitioner forthwith IA NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP 5344 OF 2015 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 to permit the petitioner to perform Kalyanostavam, other ceremonies, pending disposal of the above writ petition. IA NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP 7943 OF 2017 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 2nd Respondent to direct the 2nd Respondent to dispose of the representation dated 25-05-2015 by directing the concerned officer to hand over the complete charge of specific endowment attached to the 5th Respondent Devasthanam to the Petitioner in pursuance of the orders passed by the Endowment Tribunal in O.A.No. 954 of 2011, dt 09-11-2013, pending disposal of Writ Petition and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 receive the counter copies on record by allowing the leave petition in the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Y SUBBA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 3 1. PADMAVATHI PADNAVIS 2. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP) 3. ELEVATED AS JUDGE The Court made the following: 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 4034/2015 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein filed O.A. No.954 of 2011 before the Tribunal seeking for declaration of himself as a Trustee of the 5th respondent temple. It is further submitted that the Tribunal which is the jurisdictional authority passed an order dated 15.12.2012 in favour of the petitioner. Challenging the said order dated 15.12.2012 passed in O.A., the 5th respondent temple filed C.M.A.No.360 of 2013, which is pending for consideration before this Court. He further submits that the petitioner preferred the present Writ Petition on the premise that the orders passed in O.A. are not implemented by the respondent authorities. 3. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused of the material placed on record. It is settled law that once an order is passed in O.A., if the same is aggrieved either for implementation of the order or for modification of the same, the same can be challenged by way of filing a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. It further appears that the CMA is pending for consideration before this Court filed against the orders passed in O.A. Therefore, pending the CMA, inviting 5 orders from this Court for implementation of the very same orders is nothing but inviting contrary orders by invoking contra jurisdiction, are not maintainable. Moreover, this Court, time and again passed orders by observing that any orders passed by the endowments tribunal cannot be challenged by way of any writ petition except by way of CMA as held in W.P.No.7577 of 2008 and batch. Therefore, the present writ petition is not maintainable. 4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. __________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 06.02.2026 BSP 6 21 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 4034/2015 06.02.2026 BSP