K.B.SETHURAMAN Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The arguments in these cases were commenced by the learned senior counsel Sri C.R.Sridharan in W.P. (PIL) No.231 of 2020. Sri W.B.Srinivas, learned senior counsel argued on behalf of the petitioners in other two Writ Petitions. Learned Advocate eneral argued on behalf of the respondent-State.

(2.) W.P. (PIL) No.231 of 2020 is preferred by a person claiming to be a devotee and a person interested in the Ahobilam Math and Temple. The petitioner prays for any writ, order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of a writ of quo warranto questioning the authority of the 2nd respondent in appointing the 3rd respondent as Executive Officer of Sri Ahobila Mutt Parampara Aadheena Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Devasthanam and the authority by which the 2nd respondent has directed the 3rd respondent to change the age-old traditional administration in the name of Srivan Satagopa Sri to the one under the name and seal of the 3rd respondent and to quash the appointment order as well as order to operate bank accounts in the name and seal of the 3rd respondent thereby restoring the tradition of administration and operation of bank accounts by the Jeeyar of Sri Ahobila Mutt.

(3.) The prayer in W.P.No.5105 of 2019 is for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in imposing the 3rd respondent - Executive Officer in the administration of Ahobilam Devasthanam, which is under the management of Ahobilam Math, as unconstitutional, being ultra vires of the Act 30 of 1987, without jurisdiction, arbitrary, illegal and violative of the fundamental rights of the devotees of the Ahobilam Templ e.