IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 23292 of 2008 Between: 1 Deity Sri Gangadevi Murugulamma of Bandarulanka Rep.by its Trustee,Sri Jaina Sathiraju S/o.Venkataratnam,Hindu Bandarulanka(V) Amalapuram,East Godavari District 2 Jaina Sathiraju S/o.Venkataratnam,Hindu Sri Gangadevi Murugulamma Bandarulanka(V) Amalapuram,East Godavari District ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Revenue Divisional Officer Amalapuram,East Godavari District 2 Sub Inspector of Police Amalapuram Taluka P.S Amalapuram E.G District .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue writ of Mandamus or any appropriate writ order or direction directing the respondent herein to allow the 2nd petitioner to peforms poojas,Utsavams,Thirham and all ceremonial rituals to Goddess Sri Gangadevi Murugulamma Ie 1st petitioner deity by considering the representations given by the petitioners 14-4-2008 and 19-4- 2008 and for a consequential order directing the respondents to consider the representations given by the petitioners enabling the 2nd petitioner to perform poojas to the 1st petitioner deity and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.I.NAGESH Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.23292 of 2008 ORAL ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled aggrieved by the alleged in action on the part of the respondents in considering the complaints of the petitioners dated.14-04-2008 and 19-04-2008 with regard to the alleged interference with the management of the 1st petitioner -temple. It is the case of the petitioners that in terms of the judgment in A.S.No.15 of 1999 on the ﬁle of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Amalapuram the 2nd petitioner herein is entitled to perform pooja utsavams and all other functions in the temple in question. Since the representations are pending before the respondents herein, without expressing any opinion as to the claim made by the petitioners, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representations of the petitioners dated.14-04-2008 and 19.04.2008 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. _____________ G.ROHINI, J 31ST October, 2008 *TSNR