Telangana High Court
WP/38692/2012 of Srinivasa Varadhan T.A., Vs The State Rep.by the Principal Secretary to Govt. of A.P., on 28 December 2012
SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.38692 of 2012 Dated: 28.12.2012 Between: Srinivasa Varadhan .. Petitioner. and The State rep. by the Principal Secretary to Govt. of A.P., Revenue (Endowments) Department, Secretariat, and another. .. Respondents. Counsel for the
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Conclusion
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.38692 of 2012
Dated: 28.12.2012
Between:
Srinivasa Varadhan
.. Petitioner.
and
The State rep. by the Principal Secretary to Govt. of A.P.,and another.
Revenue (Endowments) Department, Secretariat,
.. Respondents.
Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. V.R. Avula Counsel for Respondent No.1: AGP for Endowments Counsel for Respondent No.2: Mr. Y.V. Ravi Prasad, SC for TTD
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the inactionof respondent No.2 in restoring thousand pillars Mandapam followingthe Three Men Committee report as illegal and arbitrary. The petitionersought for a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to construct MahaMandapam in restoration of the dismantled thousand pillars.
In the manner in which the writ petition is proposed to bedisposed of, it is unnecessary for this Court to refer to the facts indetail. It will suffice to note that the thousand pillars Mandapam, whichwas believed to be constructed in the 15[th] century A.D., wasdismantled in pursuance of Resolution No.359, dated 31.10.1983. TheState Government has issued Memo No.24406/Endts.III/A1/2004,dated 09.08.2004, wherein it has taken note of the sentiments of thepublic at large that dismantling of the thousand pillars Mandapam hashurt their religious sentiments. The Government has accordinglydecided to restore the Mandapam to its pristine glory at its originallocation with re-erection of all thousand pillars. A direction torespondent No.2 was issued to take up the work immediately, besidesdirecting it not to take up the work of construction of Mahaprakaram.However, on 19.10.2004, the State Government issuedG.O.Ms.No.830 appointing a Three Men Committee headed by SriP.V.R.K. Prasad, IAS (Retired), Former Executive Officer of TirumalaTirupati Devastanam to submit the report on the feasibility of reconstruction of Mahamandapam. The Committee has submitted itsreport dated 01.03.2005, wherein it has inter alia recommended forconstruction of a Mahamandapam in an area almost equal to the plintharea of the total area of the temple (to satisfy the requirement ofAgama) with exquisite stone pillars with all sides open and roofcovered recapturing the architectural and artistic beauty of thedismantled Thousand Pillars Mandapam. It has also suggested thatall the re-usable pillar stones from Thousand Pillars Mandapam shallbe integrated into the monument, either as load bearing or decorativepieces, and using modern technology, construction of an impressiveMahamandapam to accommodate around 15,000 devotees to witnessthe Arjita sevas was recommended.
The report of the Expert’s Committee was discussed byrespondent No.2 in its meeting held on 24.10.2005, wherein it hasresolved as under:
“The proposals on the Committee’s recommendations ofConstruction of Mantapam is agreed to in principle Boardresolves to permit construction of a mandapam ofpermanent nature of structure (Suitable name to beevolved) in the South-East corner of the open areameasuring 200’ (North-South) by 100’ (East-West). It isalso decided to use all available Pillars of dismantled1000 pillar structures. The Mantapam should look asancient structure.”
It appears, in pursuance of the above said resolution, the workwas entrusted to a private agency. As the contractor failed to executethe work, respondent No.2 has terminated the contract. It is at thisstage that this writ petition is filed.
When the writ petition came up for hearing on 17.12.2012,
Mr.Y.V.Ravi Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2,has taken notice and requested for time for filing counter affidavit. On26.12.2012, the learned Standing Counsel stated that respondent No.2has agreed to proceed with the construction of the stone pillars forconstruction of the Mandapam by erecting all the dismantled pillars,subject to their availability. He has requested for an adjournment forgetting further instructions. Accordingly, the case has been postedtoday.
Today, Mr. Y.V.Ravi Prasad fairly stated at the hearing thatrespondent No.2 will abide by the resolution dated 24.10.2005 asreproduced above and it will reconstruct the Mandapam by using allthe available pillars which formed part of the dismantled ThousandPillars Mandapam as resolved in the resolution dated 24.10.2005.
In the light of the above noted submission of the learnedStanding Counsel, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the direction torespondent No.2 to implement its resolution, dated 24.10.2005, in allrespects and ensure that the construction of Mandapam is commencedwithin three months from the date of receipt of this order and completethe same as expeditiously as possible.
As a sequel, WPMP.No.49088 of 2012 filed by the petitioner forinterim relief is disposed of as infructuous.
28.12.2012v v
_______________________
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J