IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No: 20810 of 2001 BETWEEN: 1 Jadaev Raju, S/o.Jadaev Bansirao, R/o.17-7-462, Brahminvadi, Yakutpura, Hyderabad. 2 Kanniboina Devender, S/o.Balaiah, R/o.17-7-799, Brahminvadi, Yakutpura, Hyderabad. ... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Commissioner of Endowments, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 2 The Asst. Commissioner of Endowments, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 3 The Custodian, Sri Swamy Hathiramji Mutt, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings of the 1st respondent in D.Dis.No.12/47623/2001 dated:18-9-2001 as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the Chapter V of the A.P.C haritable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act and Violative of Art.14 of the Constitution of India and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.C.B.RAM MOHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondents 1 & 2: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled challenging the proceedings of the Commissioner of Endowments, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, the ﬁrst respondent herein, in D.Dis.No.12/47623/2001 dated 18.09.2001. 2. The petitioners claim to be the devotees and followers of Sri Swami Hathiramji Mutt, Tirupati, the third respondent herein. Their grievance is with regard to the grant of a lease of the land belonging to the third respondent by way of the impugned proceedings. A perusal of the impugned proceedings dated 18.09.2001 would show that the ﬁrst respondent had approved the grant of lease in respect of the vacant site belonging to the third respondent for a period of one year. 3. This Court by interim order dated 05.10.2001 suspended the operation of the impugned proceedings dated 18.09.2001. No counter is filed. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that as the subject lease was for a period of only one year and in view of subsequent events which had transpired, the cause of action did not survive for adjudication in this writ petition. Taking note of the said submission, the writ petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioners to invoke appropriate remedies available to them in law in the event of any grievance in future. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ P.V. SANJAY KUMAR, J November 12, 2008 DSK