Kothakota Ananthacharyulu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Kothakota Ananthacharyulu, S/o Late K.Laxmanacharyulu aged 52 years, Occ Upa Pradhana Archaka (Retired) R/o plot No 92, Bheemas Garden, Near SNAS Temple, kasapuram Village, Guntakal mandal, Anantapuram District 515803.

¶10

...Petitioner

¶11

AND

¶12

The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary Endowments Department. Secretariat, Amaravati, Guntur^District.

¶13

The Commissioner, Endo\A^nt Department at Gollapudi,^Vijayawada Andhra Pradesh. 521225

¶14

The Executive officer, Sri Nettikanti Anjaneya Swamy van

¶15

Devasthanam. Ka^uram,village Guntakal mandal, Ananthapuram District, Andhra Pradesh 515803 ...Respondents

¶16

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 issue a writ or direction more particularly^inthe nature of Writ of mandamus by declaring the action of the respondents more particularly respondent no 3 in not considering the orders of the 2'"'^ respondent vide

¶17

R.C.No. D1/COE14026(51)/5/2025 dated 12.06.2025 to consider the petitioner representation requesting to recognizing^petitioners as hereditary trustee and submit a report enabling the 2nd r^pondent^{totakefurtheraction} as illegal and arbitrary. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent no 3 to examine the petitioner’s representation requesting to recognize petitioner as hereditary trustee^{whichwasforwarded} by respondent No 2 the Commissioner Endowments and submit a report to the 2nd respondent enabling the 2nd respondent to take^{furtheractionand} pass orders pending disposal of this Writ petition, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K AMRITH RAJ

¶19

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS

¶20

The Court made the following order:

¶21

¶22

APHC010402422025

¶23

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

¶24

AT AMARAVATI [3458]

¶25

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶26

MONDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶27

PRESENT

¶28

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶29

WRIT PETITION NO: 20905/2025

¶30

Between:

¶31

1.KOTHAKOTA ANANTHACHARYULU, S/0 LATE K.LAXMANACHARYULU AGED 52 YEARS, OCC UPA PRADHANA ARCHAKA (RETIRED) R/0 PLOT NO 92, BHEEMAS GARDEN, NEAR SNAS TEMPLE, KASAPURAM VILLAGE, GUNTAKAL MANDAL, ANANTAPURAM DISTRICT 515803.

¶32

...PETITIONER

¶33

AND

¶34

1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶35

THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT AT GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA ANDHRA PRADESH. 521225

¶36

3.THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SRI NETTIKANTI ANJANEYA SWAMY VARI DEVASTHANAM, KASAPURAM,VILLAGE GUNTAKAL MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 515803

¶37

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶38

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 a writ or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of mandamus by declaring the action of the respondents^{moreparticularly} respondent no 3 in not considering the orders of the^{2ndrespondentvide} R.C.No. D1/COE14026(51 )/5/2025 dated 12.06.2025 to consider the petitioner representation requesting to recognizing petitioners as hereditary trustee and submit a report enabling the 2nd respondent^{totakefurtheraction} as illegal and arbitrary and to pass

¶39

2

¶40

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶41

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the respondent no 3 to examine the petitioners representation requesting to recognize petitioner as^{hereditarytrusteewhich} was forwarded by respondent No 2 the Commissioner Endowments and submit a report to the 2nd respondent enabling the^{2ndrespondenttotake} further action and pass orders pending disposal of^{thisWritpetition,} in the interest of justice and equity and to pass

¶42

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶43

1.KAMRITH RAJ

¶44

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶45

1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS

¶46

The Court made the following;

¶47

ORDER:-

¶48

Heard Sri K.Amrith Raj, learned counsel for the petitioner,^learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for the 1®' and 2'^'^ respondents and Sri TVenu Gopal, learned^{StandingCounsel} appearing for the 3^'^ respondent.

¶49

The grievance of the petitioner is against the 3'"'^^respondentin not forwarding the report as requested by the 2 nd respondent, vide It is contended that one Guduru proceedings dated 12.06.2025. Bhimacharyulu, Kothakota Anantacharyulu and Kothakota Ramanujacharyulu were declared as hereditary trustees^{andarchakasofSri} Nettikanti Anjaneya Swamyvari Devasthanam Kasapuram, vide proceedings dated 15.10.1969. The petitioner is from the family of Kothakota Anantacharyulu.

¶50

3

¶51

The Commissioner vide proceedings dated 02.12.2022 has recognised the petitioner and seven others as family members of hereditary archakas of the subject Temple. And directed the Executive^Officerofthe Temple to enter the name of the petitioner, and others^asmembers of the hereditary archakas of Sri Nettikanti Anjaneya Swamy Temple, in the Register under Section 43(10) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (Act 30/1987).

¶52

It is contended that the petitioner has made a representation^to the 2"'^ respondent-commissioner to recognise him as hereditary trustee of the Temple, stating that the other family members have no objection. Pursuant to the same, vide proceedings dated 12.06.2025, the^{2'^''} respondent called for the report of the 3'^^ respondent-Executiv^{eOfficerofthe} Temple. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the 3^*^ respondentExecutive Officer, did not submit any report in pursuance of the same, and the 2"'^ respondent is proposing to constitute a new Trust^Board. It is contended that any such appointment without considering the request made by the petitioner would cause prejudice to the petitioner.

¶53

Learned Government Pleader on instructions would submit that the petitioner cannot be considered as hereditary trustee, Smt. K.Sugunamma is recognized as hereditary trustee vide proceedings in G.O.Ms.No.969, Revenue Endts-ll dated 18.09.2003. The present hereditary^trusteeofthe Temple cannot be removed without assigning any reasons. The ancestors of Smt. K.Sugunamma namely Sri K.Garudacharyulu was declared^ashereditary

¶54

trustee of subject Temple in a Civil Suit in O.S.No.4 of 1930 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Anantapuram and the same was confirmed by the High Court of Madras in A.S.No.150 of 1934 on 25.07.1938. After the death of Sri K.Garudacharyulu his son Sri K.Ramanjacharyulu succeeded as hereditary trustee - cum - archaka and he was discharging^{hisfunctionsas} hereditary trustee till he died in the year 2001. After his death, his daughter-in-law Smt.K. Sugunamma was recognized as hereditary trustee of the subject temple and she has been acting as such, as recognized hereditary trustee continuously.

¶55

In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is also from the family of Kothakota Ananthacharylu, who is his grandfather, and was recognized as hereditary trustee in 1969 and his name is also reflecting in the register that has been maintained under Section 43(10) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987(Act 30/1987). Having regard to the same, learned counsel for the petitioner argues that her appointment will not defeat the hereditary rights of the petitioner.

¶56

Considered the submissions.

¶57

Having regard to the contentions advanced, this Court is of the view that it is appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the 2"^^ respondent to pass appropriate orders pursuant to the representation of the petitioner. Needless to observe that the 3"^ respondent-Exec utive Officer shall also submit his report to the 2'^^ respondent-Commissioner within three

¶58

5

¶59

weeks from the date of the receipt after furnishing of the said report and the 2'^'^ respondent-commissioner shall pass appropriate orders within four (4)

¶60

weeks thereafter.

¶61

With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶62

As a sequel, interlocutory applications, pending if any, shall stand

¶63

closed.

¶64

//TRUE COPY//

¶65

Sd/- K.KASI RAO ACHARI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

// ^

SECTION DEPiCFR

To

The Principal Secretary Endowments Department, Secretariat, Amaravati, Guntur District.

¶70

The Commissioner, Endowment Department at Gollapudi, Vijayawada Andhra Pradesh. 521225

¶71

The Executive officer, Sri Nettikanti Anjaneya Swamy vari Devasthanam, Kasapuram,village Guntakal mandal, Ananthapuram District, Andhra Pradesh 515803

¶72