THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.20010 OF 2010 BETWEEN: Smt. Lingagiri Seetharavamma …. PETITIONER And 1. The Commissioner of Endowments, Boggulakunta, Tilak Road, Abids, Hyderabad, and another. …. RESPONDENTS Counsel for petitioner: Sri M. Vidyasagar Counsel for respondents: G.P. for Endowments The Court made the following order: ORDER: The petitioner claims to be a member of the founders’ family of Sri Bramaramba Sametha Sri Guntu Malleswara Swamy Devalayam, Khammam. It is the case of the petitioner that the said temple was constructed by the members of the family of her husband and they were managing the institution for decades. The petitioner therefore claims that she is entitled for recognition as a member of the founders’ family. In that regard she made a representation dated 27.04.2002 to the Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Khammam. It is stated that the said representation is still pending consideration. In the meanwhile, the 1st respondent has issued the impugned notice Rc.No.12/27265/2010, dated 17.06.2010 proposing to constitute a board of non-hereditary trustees. Since the claim of the petitioner has remained undecided, the petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the said notice dated 17.06.2010. Various contentions have been urged as to the eligibility of the petitioner for her recognition as a member of the founders’ family. The 2nd respondent has filed counter equally disputing her claim. I am not inclined to go into the merits as to whether the petitioner is entitled and qualified for being recognized as a member of the founders’ family. No doubt, it is sought to be contended on behalf of the respondent that once the Endowments Tribunal is constituted anyone claiming the status as a member of the founders’ family will have to approach the Tribunal under Section 87 of the Endowments Act. Indisputably, the petitioner has filed an application on 27.04.2002 before the 2nd respondent and the same has not been disposed of one way or the other. Once an application has been filed, the statutory authority is expected to consider the same and pass appropriate orders. In the circumstances, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law on the representation of the petitioner dated 27.04.2002, as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the meanwhile, the impugned notice Rc.No.12/27265/2010, dated 17.06.2010 shall be kept in abeyance. It is made clear that subject to the orders that may be passed as directed above, the impugned order may be acted upon. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 7th July, 2011 Js