Gongalla Vishwanath and Another v. The State of Telangana and 4 Others
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2025-03-04. Gongalla Vishwanath and Another v. The State of Telangana and 4 Others. Read the judgment and...
Judgment text
[ I HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction) TWO THOUSAND AND TWENI,Y FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION NO: 56330F 2021 Between: Late Somaia' ? qcffi3f'^ffid;f,"H3'Lr:E 1. Gongalla vishwanath'-s/o: 49d ' Miiiiiitr"-d-Swami rempte Sirichelma Village' I District. about 71 Years' 2. Triupthi Mailesham, S/o: Late Vishwanasth' ^Aged ' Temple Sirichelma vi[lage, lchoda ci"ll"i*i#,--dii Marrirariuna Swamv Mandal, Adilabad District. ... PETITIONERS AND Rep. by its. Principal Secretary' Endowments 1. The State of Telangana, Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad' Office of the Commissioner' Endowments 2. The Additional Commissioner, Department, HYderabad. Endowments, Adilabad' 3. The Assistant Commissioher, 4. The Executive officer, Sri Mallikariuna swamy Temple, sirichelmi ViHage' lchoda Mandal, Adilabad District' s.
Sri Mallikariuna Swamy Temple, Rep' by its Executive Officer' Sirichelma Village, lchbda Mandai, Adilabad District' ... RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances statea in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be particularly one in pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction' more ihe nature- of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent No'2 in the 4th issuing the Procs. L. Dis. N o. Ml6O79t2O2O dl. 3l1ot2o2o appointkrg sth respondent temple without respondent herein as Executive Officer of the of the and as being lllegal' arbitrary and unjust following the procedure contemplated, same. consequently set aside the lA NO: I OF 20r! Petiticn unCr:r Section 1S1 CpC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filr;d in support of the petition, the High Court may be lrlerased to direct the responcert No. 2 to 5 herein not to interfere in the dsy.
1s-62ry affairs of the temple or i, e n'7 nranner disturbing the occasion of Mahastrivat'i festivar at sri Mallikarjuna S',;rrrv Tempre, Siricherma Viflage, rchoda Mandar, Ariiiabad District, in the intere:it of jLrstice. lA NO: 2 oF 2ct2l Petitic'n urrr er Section 151 cpc praying that in the circrmstarrces stated in the affidavit filed lr support of the petition, the High Court . nay be pleased to suspend the F'ror;s. L. Dis. No. pf. r607gr2020 dt. 3t10r2020 ,ssur-,d by the 2nd respondent hereirr pending disposal of the main petition. Writ Counsel for th(! l)otitioners: SRI GAJANAND CHAKRAVARTHI Counsel for ther fk:s;pondent Nos. l to 3: Gp FOR ENDOWMENTS counsel for ther Fl. spondent Nos. 4 and 5: sRr vrJAy PRAKASH. sic The Court mad,3 l:f,e following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JI,STICE NAGF^SH BHEEMAPAXA WRIT PETITIONNo .
5633 of 2021 ORDER: When the matter has been taken up for for petitioners submitted that the hearing, learned counsel for petition does not survive cause in the present writ become adjudication and it has infructuous' same, Writ Petition is dismissed 2. In view of the as infructuous. No costs. applications 3. Consequenfly, miscellaneous closed' Petition, shall stand pending, if any, in this Writ SD/. N SRIHARI DEPUW REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. One CC to Sri Gajanand Chakravarthi, Advocate [OpUC] 2. Two CCs to GP for Endowments, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUTJ 3. One CC to Sd Vijay prakash, SC[OpUC] ' 4. Two CD Copies TJ w cHs \ I HIGH COURT DATED:0,4ltl:3l2O2S ORDER /-- rti :Ii,-''.. *c, \ ,/.... (t'' ,ilt WP. No. 563it of 2021 ,i iut,i ? M5 3 4. / t '// DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUCTTI 5 *,rrouT cosTs ncY@b tr irEE'
Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.