Pelluri Syamasundara Rao vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Endowments
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Disposed
Before:
Hon'ble K Manmadha Rao
Listed On:
17 Sept 2024
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
APHC010364502012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3310]
TUESDAY ,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 5558/2012
Between:
Pelluri Syamasundara Rao ...PETITIONER
AND
The Deputy Commissioner Of Endowments and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.N GURU GOPAL
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP)
2.S NARENDRANATH REDDY
3.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
seeking the following relief:
"….to issue a writ order or direction especially one in the nature of the Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.3 in not taking action against the respondent No 4 and in not appointing the Executive Officer U/s 29 of the Endowments Act for Sri Seetharamaswamy Temple Seetharamapuram, Ongole as illegal, void and further declare that the action of the Respondent No.1 in trying to appoint the Trust Board to Sri Seetharama Swamy Temple, Seetharamapuram Ongole through impugned Notification in Rc.No.A5/1105/12, dated 16.02.2012 without waiting for the outcome of the O.A.No 953 of 2011 on the file of the 2nd respondent amounts to denial of statutory right of the petitioner for being appointed as a Chairman and consequently set aside the Notification in Rc.No.A5/1105/12 dated 16.02.2012 and further direct the respondent No.3 to appoint an Executive Officer to manage the affairs of Sri Seetharama Swamy Temple Seetharamapuram Ongole."
-
On an earlier occasion, i.e., on 20.08.2024, as the learned counsel for the petitioner passed away, this Court has directed the Registry to issue notice to the petitioner.
-
As per the office endorsement, dated 13.09.2024 notice sent to the petitioner was returned unserved due to insufficient address. In view of the same, this Court is unable to proceed further in this matter and it seems that the petitioner has no interest in prosecuting this Writ Petition.
-
Hence, this Writ Petition is dismissed as non prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________________ DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J.
Dated : 17.09.2024 TM