B. SRINIVAS SINGH v. THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
Judgment
Cause title
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION NO: 18248/2013 Between:
1. B. SRINIVAS SINGH,, S/O. LATE DADA AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: JUNIOR ASSISTANT OF SRI LAKSHMI NARASIMHA TEMPLE, MANGALGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT R/O. DOOR NO. 8-593, NEAR VEGETABLE MARKET, MANGALGIRI TOWN AND MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, BOGGULAKUNTA, HYDERABAD.
2. SRI LAKSHMI NARASIMHA SWAMY TEMPLE, MANGALGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT., REP. EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
3. UNDAVALLI GROUP TEMPLES, UNDAVALLI VILLAGE, TADEPALLI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. REP. BY EXECUTIVE OFFICER. ...RESPONDENT(S)
: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toto issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, a) Declaring the proceedings of 1st respondent i.e. The Commissioner, Endowments Department, Hyderabad I in RC No. B1/20925/2011 dated 24-05-2013-repatriating from 2rd respondent-Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Temple, Mangalgiri, Guntur District to the 3rd respondent -Undavalli Group Temples, Undavalli Village, Tadepalli the petitioner W.P.No.18248_2013 HN, J 2 Mandal, Guntur District as illegal, void , arbitrary, and voilative of Sec. 57 of The Andhra Pradesh Charitable & Hindu Religious Institutions & Endowments Act 1987 b) consequently set aside the proceedings of 1st respondent- The Commissioner, Endowments Department, Hyderabad in RC No. B1/20925/2011 dated 24-05-2013 and pass. IA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 22276 OF 2013 the operation of Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to the proceedings of 1st respondent- The suspend Commissioner, Endowments Department, Hyderabad i.e. RC No. B1/20925/2011 dated 24-05-2013 and consequentially direct the Respondent No. 1 & 2 to continue the petitioner at 2nd Respondent temple i.e. of Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Temple, Mangalgiri, Guntur District, R/o. Door No. 8-593, Near Vegetable Market, Mangalgiri Town and Mandal, Guntur District and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. T S RAYALU Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. V T M PRASAD
2. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS W.P.No.18248_2013 HN, J 3
ORDER:
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner requests time. The learned Standing counsel for the respondents submits that the grievance of the petitioner has been adequately addressed by the respondents, and that the petitioner is now working with respondent No.2 on a deputation basis.
Recording the same, the present writ petition is closed, leaving it the petitioner to challenge any other subsequent proceedings, if so aggrieved. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date:11.03.2026 NKA W.P.No.18248_2013 HN, J 4 75 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 18248 of 2013 Date: 11.03.2026 NKA
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 11 Mar 2026. The bench was HARINATH N.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.