HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.24937 of 2010 Date 05.10.2010 Between: M.Rajasekhar Reddy. ..... PETITIONER AND The Government of A.P., rep. By its Principal Secretary, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others. .....RESPONDENT Counsel for the petitioner :Sri M.Dilip Kumar Counsel for the Respondent : Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.24937 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner, who claims to be the Chairman and President of Ayyappa Swamy Temple of Gorantla Village, Hindupur Mandal, Anantapur District, filed the Writ Petition feeling aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in assigning the land as proposed in endorsement dated 24.01.2005 of respondent No.3. I have heard Sri M.Dilip Rao, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and perused the record. The petitioner appeared to have made a representation on 18.01.2005 to respondent No.3 for allotment of land admeasuring Ac.0.89 cents in Sy.No.303-1 and Ac.0.12 cents in Sy.No.303-2 of Gorantla Village for construction of Ayyappa Swamy Temple. Respondent No.3, thereupon, obtained a report from the Mandal Revenue Inspector-I, Gorantla and issued an endorsement dated 24.01.2005 setting apart the above-mentioned land for the purpose of construction of the temple. It is further stated in the said endorsement that the site will be handed over after alienation proceedings are received from the Government. In this Writ Petition, the petitioner has averred that subsequent to the issue of the above endorsement, no action has been taken by any of the respondents. The petitioner has failed to file any material to show that he has made efforts for obtaining approval of respondent No.1 in pursuance of the endorsement dated 24.01.2005 made by respondent No.3. Evidently, the petitioner has not moved respondent Nos.1 and 2 for implementation of the proposal made by respondent No.3. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to pursue the matter with respondent Nos.1 and 2 and it is only if he fails in attempts to persuade the said respondents, he can approach this Court for an appropriate relief. In this view of the matter, the Writ Petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach respondent Nos.1 and 2 for redressal of his grievance. As a sequel to disposal of the main petition, WPMP.No.31884 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:05.10.2010 usd