Telangana High Court
WP/20365/2004 of Smt.K.Lakshmi Devamma, Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, on 24 December 2007
G. YETHIRAJULU W.P.No.20365 of 2004 Dated this the 24th day of December, 2007 Between: Smt. K. Lakshmi Devamma … Petitioner AND The Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Mahabubnagar District, Mahabubnagar … Respondent HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE G. YETHIRAJULU W.P.No.20365 of
HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE G. YETHIRAJULU
W.P.No.20365 of 2004
Dated this the 24[th] day of December, 2007
Between:
Smt. K. Lakshmi Devamma … Petitioner
AND
The Assistant Commissioner ofEndowments, Mahabubnagar District,Mahabubnagar … Respondent HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE G. YETHIRAJULU
W.P.No.20365 of 2004
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.
ORDER:
This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to declare that the action of the respondent-Assistant Commissioner ofEndowments, Mahabubnagar, calling for the applications from thepublic for constituting a non-hereditary trust board to Sri NarasimhaSwamy Vemulavada Devastanam, Appreddypally village, MadugulaMandal, Mahabubnagar District is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law.
2) The petitioner contended that the petitioner has filed anapplication on 20.05.2000 before the respondent seeking to declarethat she is a member belonging to the family of founders and sought forrecognition as founder trustee. Though the application was filed in theyear 2000, the respondent has not passed any order on it till today,instead he issued impugned proceedings dated 21.06.2004 calling forthe applications from the public under Section 15 (3) of theEndowments Act for constitution of a non-hereditary trust board to thesubject temple.
3) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that therespondent ought to have taken steps for appointment of trust boardafter deciding the right of the petitioner to be recognized as member ofthe founder’s family. Therefore, he requested to quash the impugnedproceedings on the ground of non-passing of any orders on theapplication of the petitioner, dated 20.05.2000.
4) The interim injunction was given by this Court on06.06.2005 to dispose of the application made by the petitioner withinone week from the date of receipt of the order. But, there was noinformation whether any order was passed on the application made bythe petitioner. No purpose will be served by keeping the writ petitionpending.
5) Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing therespondent to communicate the order, if any, passed on the applicationof the petitioner, dated 20.05.2000. If no order has been passed, the respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders after givingopportunity to the respective parties within four weeks from the date ofreceipt of copy of this order and if there is any proposal for appointmentof trust board, the respondent is directed to take further steps afterdisposal of the application of the petitioner, dated 20.05.2000. Noorder as to costs.
_________________
Dr.G. YETHIRAJULU, J
Date: 24-12-2007Isn