C.VENKATA REDDY Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition is filed, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

(2.) Averments in affidavit, in brief, are that Sri Seetha Ramanjaneya Swamy Temple was constructed and developed by the grandfather of petitioner by name Late Sri Chimala Venkata Reddy. After the death of grandfather of petitioner, father of petitioner by name Narayana Reddy managed the affairs of the temple. Thereafter, petitioner has been managing the affairs of the temple. One Obul Reddy formed respondent No.5 committee without the knowledge of petitioner. Respondent No.5 committee with the help of local member of legislative assembly submitted representation to respondent No.4 for sanction of Rs.100.00 lakhs i.e. Rs.80.00 lakhs + Rs.20.00 lakhs of public contribution for renovation/reconstruction of temple.

(3.) Respondent No.5 filed counter affidavit. It was contended inter-alia, that petitioner is residing at Hyderabad. Petitioner never participated in day-to-day affairs of the temple, and he occasionally visits the temple and participates in hereditary rituals. Petitioner was not recognized as hereditary trustee of the temple. Grama Sabha was conducted on 11/10/2021. Respondent No.5 was elected as honorary president of the committee and petitioner was elected as president of the renovation committee. Villagers' of Gundemadakala Village have contributed 25% and it was kept in bank account bearing No.91144332139 of Andhra Pragathi Bank, as per pre-condition for release of 75% of amount from respondent No.4. The fund will be released by the Deputy Executive Engineer (General) duly following financial assistance under TTD, after receipt of public contribution of Rs.20.00 lakhs. The Engineer of Andhra Pradesh Endowments Department will invite tenders for renovation work. The work proposed is only laying black granite stone in RCC framework for Garbhalayam and ardhamandapam etc. Eventually, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.