1 APHC010196172026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 10061/2026 Between: 1. THOTA MURALI,, S/O. AITAM RAJU, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, TRUSTEE, SRI MALLESWARA SWAMY TEMPLE, KOTHAPALLI NARIKELAPALLI(V), TSUNDURU (M), BAPATLA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY REVENUE (ENDOWMENTS), AP SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS, AP ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, GUNTUR. 4. THE DISTRICT ENDOWMENT OFFICER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, BAPATLA. 5. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SRI MALLESWARA SWAMY TEMPLE, KOTHAPALLI NARIKELAPALLI (V), TSUNDUR 2 MANDAL, BAPATIA 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 topleased to issue any writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in orally threatening us and demanding us not to go ahead with the reopening of Sri Malleswara Swamy Temple, Kothapalli Narikelapalli(V), Tsunduru (M), Bapatia District as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents not to obstruct the reopening activity of Sri Malleswara Swamy Temple, Kothapalli Narikelapalli(V), Tsunduru (M), Bapatia District, dated 18-04- 2026 in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. DHARANI KUMAR B Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS 3 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA W.P.No.10061 of 2026 This Court made the following ORDER: The case of the petitioner is that the Respondent Nos.3 to 5 are threatening the petitioner and demanding not to go ahead with the reopening of newly renovated/constructed “Sree Bhramaraamba Sameta Malleswara Swami Temple” by the renovation Committee. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein was appointed as one of the trustees along with four others vide proceedings dated 08.11.2021 duly issued by the 3rd Respondent and period of trusteeship is for a period of 2 years. Whereas the Committee of the trustees carried out the new construction/renovation of the temples within the premises of Sree Bhramaraamba Sameta Malleswara Swami Temple, Kottapalli naarikelapalli Village, Chunduru Mandal, Bapatla District. Since the re- construction/renovation of the temples was completed by the renovation committee, the trustees committee is intended to 4 celebrate re-consecration/renovation day celebrations of deities of Sree Bhramaraamba Sameta Malleswara Swami Temple. Whereas, the programmes/Poojas were already notified by way of paper pamphlet by the renovation committee consisting of Committee of Trustees and village devotees. It is further stated that even though the period of Trust Committee was completed by November, 2023 itself, but still they have been looking after the affairs of the temple till date. Hence the writ petition. 2. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader had furnished the written instructions and public notice issued by the 5th Respondent stating that no permission was accorded by the competent authority for conducting any renovation/re- consecration celebrations to the deity of Sree Bhramaraamba Sameta Malleswara Swami Temple. It is further stated that the entire renovation of the temples were carried out of CGF (Common Good Fund) funds through a contractor but still the works are under progress and some of the works should be completed. Therefore, without there being any proper permissions from the authority concerned and without completion of the construction the re-consecration of deities as well as reopening of the temple cannot be carried out by the alleged 5 renovation committee. It is further stated that the subject renovation committee was also not duly appointed by the respondents herein. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. 4. Considering the submission made by both the counsel, it is observed that except paper pamphlet indicating the programmes for re-consecration of deities and reopening of temples, no other proceedings of permission duly granted by the authority concerned was filed herewith. On the other hand, the Trusties Committee, which was constituted on 08.11.2021, which is only for a period of two years and that period was already been completed by 2023 itself. Therefore, the said Committee cannot carry out any activity in respect of the temple as if still they are continuing as trust committee. It is settled law that if the trust committee is appointed for a particular period, it neither to be continued nor can be acted more than the period for which they are appointed in the absence of reconstitution or extension of period for subject trust board. Admittedly, in the instant case neither there is extension nor there is re-constitution of the trust board. Therefore, the petitioner himself cannot file the writ 6 petition as a trustee of the temple. On the other hand since the entire construction/renovation of the temple of deities were carried out with CGF funds, as per the Sastras, the temple deities can be re-consecrated and celebrations can be done only after completion of construction in full-fledged manner and as per the notice issued by the 5th Respondent (Executive Officer), who is the authority accountable and responsible to carry out the entire construction at the temple and to held the celebrations categorically stated that still the construction is under progress. Therefore, without completion of the works and without proper permissions the “Punah Pratishta (పునః ప్రతిష్ఠ )” celebrations cannot be done at this juncture as per the will and wish of unauthorized trust Committee/Renovation Committee as well as village committee consisting of devotees. Hence there should be an express / written permission for re-consecration. 5. In view of the reasons stated as above, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the oral threats of the respondents or whatever alleged by the petitioner. However, the petitioner is permitted to make a request or representation to the authorities concerned immediately either by way of written representation and after such representation the respondent Nos.3 to 5 should 7 consider and pass appropriate orders by 18.04.2026 since the programmes were already notified. If the respondents permit the petitioner to celebrate re-consecration celebrations of deities of Sree Bhramaraamba Sameta Malleswara Swami Temple, the jurisdictional police authorities shall ensure that the law and order is duly maintained during the said celebrations. 6. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. _________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J DT: 17.04.2026 krk 8 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA W.P.No.10061 of 2026 DT: 17.04.2026 krk 58 9