Saripalli Kishore Vs the State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

Saripalli Kishore Vs the State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the proceedings issued by the 5th respondent, the Commissioner of Endowments, AP, Vijayawada, in K.Dis.No.B2/COE -12026(31)/26/2022 dated 19-10-2022 appointing Respondents 6 to 13 as trustees of Sri Mahaganapathi, Prasanna Venkateswara, Shiridi Saibaba, Ayyappa Swamy Temples, Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam, are bad, illegal, arbitrary, opposed to law, and contrary to the provisions of the Endowments Act and the rules framed under G.O.Rt.No.258.

Ratio / Principle

On the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for further adjudication and the writ petition has become infructuous, the Court held the writ petition infructuous and dismissed it as such.

Key takeaways

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition were directed to stand closed consequentially.ratio¶47-48

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction), single Judge — Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda, J. — W.P. No. 8807 of 2023 (Saripalli Kishore v. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Endowments-H) Department and others), decided 10.03.2026. DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the cause in the writ petition did not survive for further adjudication and the writ petition had become infructuous; accepting this, the Court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous and directed that Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending therein stand closed. The petition had sought a writ of mandamus declaring bad, illegal, arbitrary and void the proceedings of the 5th respondent, Commissioner of Endowments, AP, Vijayawada, in K.Dis.No.B2/COE -12026(31)/26/2022, dated 19-10-2022, appointing Respondents 6 to 13 as trustees of Sri Mahaganapathi, Prasanna Venkateswara, Shiridi Saibaba, Ayyappa Swamy Temples, Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam, as contrary to the provisions of the Endowments Act and the rules framed under G.O.Rt.No.258. No adjudication on merits; the substantive question of legality of the trustee appointments remains undecided.

::1::

APHC010172202023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3329]

TUESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

WRIT PETITION NO: 8807/2023

Between:

SARIPALLI KISHORE, S/O SLL.M.RAO, AGED ABOUT. 58 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O BALAJINAGAR, SIRIPURAM, NEAR. ANDHRA UNIVERSITY, VISAKHAPATNAM.

...PETITIONER

AND

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REVENUE (ENDOWMENTS-H) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS, VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH.

SRI MAHAGANAPATHI, PRASANNA VENKATESWARA, SHIRIDI SAIBABA, AYYAPPA SWAMY TEMPLES, SEETHAMMADHARA, VISAKHAPATNAM, REP.BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS,

::2::

VISAKHAPATNAM.

THE COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA.

SMT MADIRAJU KANAKAVALLI, W/O RAMGOPAL AGED ABOUT. NOT KNOWN,

KVBS NAGA RAJU, S/O SATYANARAYANA RAJU AGED ABOUT. NOT KNOWN,

SMT KATTAMURI SARALA DEVI, W/O SATISH AGED ABOUT. NOT KNOWN,

MANTRI SAI KIRAN REDDY, S/O SOMASEKHAR REDDY, AGED ABOUT. NOT KNOWN,

KODURI SATYANARAYANA, S/O VEERA SWAMY, AGED ABOUT. NOT KNOWN,

SMT SOBHANAPURAM JHANSI, W/O TIRUMALA, AGED ABOUT. NOT KNOWN,

S MT KARRI SUDHARANI, W/O RAMA REDDY, AGED ABOUT. NOT KNOWN,

D RAJU, S/O NOT KNOWN, AGED ABOUT. NOT KNOWN, ARCHAKA, EX-OFFICIO MEMBER. (RESPONDENTS 6 TO 13 ALL AKE NON-HEREDITARY TRUSTEES OF SRI MAHAGANAPATHI, PRASANNA VENKATESWARA, SHIRIDI SAIBABA, AYYAPPA SWAMY TEMPLES, SEETHAMMADHARA, VISAKHAPATNAM)

...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 issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly a writ in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the proceedings of the 5th respondent i.e.,

::3::

Commissioner of Endowments, AP, Vijayawada issued in K.Dis.No.B2/COE -12026(31)/26/2022, dated 19-10-2022 appointing respondents 6 to 13 as trustees to Sri Mahaganapathi, Prasanna Venkateswara, Shiridi Saibaba, Ayyappa Swamy Temples, Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam, rep.by its Executive Officer, as bad, illegal, arbitrary, opposed to law, contrary to the provisions of the Endowments Act and also the rules framed under G.O.Rt.No.258 and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.M VIDYASAGAR

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS

::4::

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

W.P.No.8807 of 2023

This Court made the following

ORDER:

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause in

the writ petition does not survive for further adjudication and

hence, the writ petition becomes infructuous.

2. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is dismissed as

infructuous.

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in

the writ petition shall stand closed.

_________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J

DT: 10.03.2026 krk

::5::

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

182

W.P.No.8807 of 2023

DT: 10.03.2026

krk