Disposed

Kavuri Sasi Rekha, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC6 Mar 2025WP/5526/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging the respondent temple's refusal to allow the petitioner to discharge trustee functions. The court directed the temple to permit participation in festivals without hindrance.

What did the court decide?

The third respondent is directed to allow the petitioner to participate in festivals and functions conducted by the temple and shall not cause any hindrance to her in discharging her duties.

Kavuri Sasi Rekha, Vs The State of Andhra… — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

FRIDAYrTHE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 5526 OF 2025

¶6

Between:

¶7

Kavuri Sasi Rekha, W/o Vinay Kumar, Aged about 49 Years, Chairman of Board of Trustees at Sri Venugopala Swamy Temple, Nemali Village, Gampalagudem Mandal, Krishna District, R/o H.No. 3-97, Gandhi Street, Nemali Village, Gampalagudem Mandal, Krishna District.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Endowments) Department Velgapudi, Secretariat Buildings, Amaravathi, Guntur District. Rep. by its Principal Secretary.

¶11

The Commissioner, Endowments Department, Gollapudi, Vijayawada 3. Sri Venugopala Swamy Temple, Nemali Village, Gampalagudem Mandal, Krishna District, Rep. by its Executive officer

¶12

...RESPONDENTS

¶13

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 an appropriate writ order or direction ore particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the^actionofthe respondents more particularly respondents in not allowing the petitioner and board of trustees constituted by the 1st respondent^{hereinvideG.O.Rt} No. 317 dated 14.03.2024 to discharge functions as Board of Trustees in the 3rd respondent institution and perform the duties and powers of trusteesas bad, illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 25 and 26 of

¶14

Constitution of India and also contrary to the provisions^{ofAndhraPradesh} Charitable And Hindu Religious Institutions And Endowments Act, 1987 (Act 30/87) and consequently direct the respondents to allow the petitioner and Board of trustees constituted by the 1st respondent^{hereinvideG.O.Rt} No. 317 dated 14.03.2024 to discharge functions as^{BoardofTrustees} in the 3rd respondent institution and also allow them to take decisions for rituals and other festivals etc., as per the provisions of law i.e. Endowments Act 30/87 which will be conducted in the 3^^ respondent institution.

¶15

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶16

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstances} stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner^and Board of trustees constituted by the 1st respondent herein vide G.O.Rt No. 317 dated 14.03.2024 to discharge functions as Board of Trustees in the 3 rd respondent institution by allowing them to take part in Brahmostavams which will be conducted from 12.03.2025 and 17.03.2025 in the 3rd respondent institution.

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRi D.V.SASiDHAR

¶18

Counsei for the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2: SRi SRINIVAS PATHURI,

¶19

ASST.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS

¶20

Counsei for the Respondent No.3: SRi KOTESWARA RAO KAPPERA, SC FOR ENDOWMENTS

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

APHC010111032025

¶23

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

5- Ip

AT AMARAVATI

[3458]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶28

FRIDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶29

PRESENT

¶30

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶31

WRIT PETITION NO: 5526/2025

¶32

Between:

¶33

Kavuri Sasi Rekha, ...PETITIONER

¶34

AND

¶35

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶36

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶37

1.D VSASIDHAR

¶38

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶39

1.KOTESWARA RAO KAPPERA SC For Endowments

¶40

2.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS

¶41

The Court made the following:

¶42

ORDER;-

¶43

Heard Sri D.V.Sasidhar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Koteswara Rao Kappera, learned Standing Counsel^{forEndowmentsand} Srinivas Pathuri, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments. 2. Challenging the action of the respondents in not allowing the petitioner and the Board of Trustees of the temple constituted by the 1®* respondent vide G.O.Rt.No.317 dated 14.03.2024, to discharge the

¶44

functions as Board of Trustees in the respondent institution, the present writ petition is filed. 3. The contention of the petitioner is that the 3"'^ respondent is excluding the petitioner acting high handedly, and not notifying the petitioner about any festivals or events that are conducted in the temple,and the petitioner was also never informed of the counting of hundi offerings. 4. The 3^'* respondent filed counter affidavit stating that the Board of Trustees including the petitioner were always informed of the events of the temple and requested them to take part, however, they refused to participate. The fact that the Board of Trustees and the petitioner were informed about the scheduled functions and events that are performed in the Temple, would reflect that the entire activities of the temple are being conducted in transparent manner, in accordance with the procedure. Further contended that the omission of the petitioner’s name from the list of trustees on wall poster, is due to the enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct for the MLC elections in the State of Andhra Pradesh and was not an intentional act or omission.

¶45

Having regard to the contentionsadvanced, this Court is of the view that the 3^^ respondent shall allow the petitioner to participate in the festivals and functions that may be conducted by the temple and shall not cause any hindrance to the petitioner in discharging^herduties. 6. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶46

¶47

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

¶48

closed.

¶49

Sd/- P. VINOD KUMAR //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANTt REGISTRAR

To,

SEC ICER

The Principal Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Endowments) Department, State of Andhra Pradesh Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.

¶54

The Commissioner, Endowments Department, Gollapudi, Vijayawada

¶55

The Executive Officer, Sri Venugopala Swamy Temple, Nemali Village, Gampalagudem Mandal, Krishna District. (BY RPAD)

¶56

One CC to Sri D.V.Sasidhar, Advocate [OPUC]

¶57

Two CCs to GP for Endowments, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶58

One CC to Sri Koteswara Rao Kappera, SC for Endowments. [OPUC]

¶59

Three CD Copies.

HIGH COURT

DATED:07/03/2025

ORDER

WP.No.5526 of 2025

i^OFA^
O'
:'a:
;0 2 ^ mar 2025
Current Section
....fT*

¶66

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

Kavuri Sasi Rekha, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kavuri Sasi Rekha, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

H Ramasubrahmanyam Vs the State of Ap

Dedekula Bujji, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Chintala Amareswara Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Shaik Mahamood, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Valatoti Rajasekhar Vs the State of Ap

K Srinivasulu Vs Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation