SANA NAGESWARA RAO Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners being aggrieved by the proceedings in Rc.No.E2/15021/61/2021, dated 28.04.2021, issued by the 2nd respondent, appointing an Executive Officer for Sri Nookalamma Ammavari Temple, Lingarajupalem Village, S.Rayavaram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, have approached this Court by way of the present writ petition.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioners that the income of the said temple is only Rs.1,20,000/- per annum and as such, an Executive Officer should not be appointed in the normal course unless there are special reasons for appointment of an Executive Officer. The petitioners submits that the appointment of the Executive Officer by way of the Impugned proceedings dated 28.04.2021, does not set out any special reasons except stating that there was a request from the Secretary of Gram Panchayat and village elders has villager elder for the administration of temple to be taken over by the Endowment department by appointing of Executive Officer. It is further submitted that when the secretary of village Panchayat was contacted, he had denied any such request made and had in fact gave proceeding in writing stating that no such complaint was made by the Secretary.

(3.) The respondents, have now submitted written instructions wherein it is stated the land belonging to the temple is not being shown as the property of the temple and further the affairs of the temple require proper supervision etc. However, none of these reasons are contented in the impugned order and are now being supplied by way of written instructions. The dictum of Hon'ble Supreme in the case of M.S.Gill and another Vs. Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi and Others. , 1978 AIR(SC) 851 (+ 1978 SCR Co.(3) 272.) that reasons for an administrative order cannot be supplemented by subsequent pleadings still holds the field.