Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/28368/2025 of KONDEBOYINA RAMESH Vs THE STATE OF AP on 15 October 2025
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 28368 OF 2025 Between: 1. KONDEBOYINA RAMESH, S/O CHINNA VENKATA SUBBAIAH,
APHC010526152025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
Between:
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.
1. KONDEBOYINA RAMESH, S/O CHINNA VENKATA SUBBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O 2-69, GORLAGADDA VILLAGE, MARKAPURAM MANDALAM, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (ENDOWMENTS),
SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2)
2. THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA. 3)
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4)
4. THE DISTRICT ENDOWEMENT OFFICER, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ONGOLE. 5)
5. SRI LAKSHMI NARASIMHA SWAMY VARI DEVASTHANAM, AMMAVARIPALLE VILLAGE, MARKAPURAM MANDALAM, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. REP 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 to pleased to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction to DECLARE the action of the respondent No. 3 in not considering my dated 08.07.2025 requesting to recognize me as founder family member of Sri Sri Sri Narasimha Swamy @ Yogi Narasimha Swamy varu who is founder of the 4TH respondent temple and donor of huge properties to the same, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of provisions of AP Charitable and Hindu Religious Institution and Endowments Act, 1987 and rules made there under as also contrary to Articles 14, 25 26 of Constitution of India and consequently DIRECT respondents No. 3 to consider my representation dated 08.07.2025, in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. J.V.PHANIDUTH Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS
The Court made the following order:
Heard Sri J.V.Phaniduth, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Smt. Devi Subhashini Anne, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.5. With the consent of both the learned counsel, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 3rd respondent is not considering the representation dated 08.07.2025 filed by the petitioner seeking recognition as a founder family member of the 4th respondent-Temple.
3. The petitioner claims to be the great-grandson of Sri Sri Sri Narasimha Swamy @ Yogi Narasimha Swamy varu, who had built the subject Temple in 1935 and endowed all the properties to the deity for the dhoopa, deepa and naivedyam. The petitioner contends that the petitioner’s great-grandfather has dedicated all his properties to Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Vari Devasthanam.
4. He further contends that several representations were submitted to the respondents to protect the temple properties. Upon submission of the representation, the 4th respondent submitted a report to the 2nd respondent and the 2nd respondent appointed an executive officer to the 5th respondent, Temple. However, the 5th respondent did not take any action for the protection of the property. Thus, the petitioner filed a writ petition in W.P.No.21079 of
2025. This Court disposed of the writ petition on 09.09.2025, directing the respondents to take necessary steps to protect the temple properties. The petitioner had further submitted a representation dated 08.07.2025 to the 3rd respondent to recognize the petitioner as a founder family member of the subject Temple. But no orders have been passed on the same, so far.
5. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, Smt. Devi Subhashini Anne, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent No.5-Temple submits that the representation filed by the petitioner is under consideration before the 3rd respondent and that he has called for report from the Inspector, Endowments Department.
6. Having regard to the submissions made, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the representation dated 08.07.2025 submitted by the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.
_______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date: 16.10.2025 BSK
Date: 16.10.2025 BSK