S. RAVI, S/O. LATE MR. T.V. SHESHACHAR Vs. SRI. VENKATA NARASIMHAMURTHY, S/O. SRI. VENKATARAMANACHAR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE 11th Respondent -Appellant herein has presented this appeal, assailing the correctness of the impugned order dated 15/07/2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 15049/2008, wherein, the Petitioner -first Respondent herein has assailed the correctness of the order dated 22.3.2004 vide Annexure -J passed by the Commissioner for Religious and Charitable Endowments.

(2.) THE Petitioner first Respondent, assailing the correctness of the order dated 22.3.2009 passed by the Commissioner for Religious and Charitable Endowments, transferring the Barvardar rights in favour of the 11th Respondent Appellant herein has presented a Writ Petition before this Court in No. 15049/2008, contending that his father T. Venkataramanachar was the Archak of Sri. Prasanna Venkata Ramana Swamy Temple at Chikka Tirupathi, Malur Taluk, after his demise, his five sons, including the first Respondent herein succeeded as Barvardars. It is further contended by him that, for the convenience purpose, he and his brothers agreed to enter the name of Sri. T.V. Sheshachar, who is one of the brother as Barvardar. By the order dated 22.3.2004, the Commissioner for Religious and Charitable Endowments has transferred the Barvardar Rights from the name of Sri. T.V. Sheshachar to the name of 11th Respondent - Appellant herein who is his younger son. The said Writ Petition had come up for consideration before the learned Single Judge, who in turn, after perusal of the material available on record and after hearing the parties, has disposed of the said Writ Petition with a direction to the third Respondent herein to consider the representations given by the first Respondent and his brothers vide Annexures - F and G dated 18.8.2001 and 24.12.2001 respectively, in accordance with law, by providing an opportunity to them, as expeditiously as possible and in any event not later than three months from the date of receipt of the copy of the said order. Further, the learned Single Judge has observed that while considering the representations submitted by the first Respondent and his brother vide Annexures -F and G, third Respondent herein shall not be influenced by the impugned order Annexure -J. Being aggrieved by the order impugned passed by the learned Single Judge, 11th Respondent -Appellant herein felt necessitated to present this appeal.

(3.) THE principal submission canvassed by the learned Counsel for the Appellant Sri. N.K. Gupta, is that, learned Single Judge is not justified in issuing a direction to the third Respondent herein to consider the representations vide Annexures -F and G dated 18.8.2001 and 24.12.2001 respectively, on the ground that, they themselves have given no objection before the Tahsildar when he has submitted his report and also before the Deputy Commissioner. In the light of the no objection given by the first Respondent and his brothers, Appellant has been appointed as Barvardar and therefore, the question of giving an opportunity to them does not arises. Therefore, he submitted that the said direction issued by the learned Single Judge cannot be sustained and is liable to set aside.