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 C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO:1616 of 2002 Between: Sri Arogyasadanam Trust, Sri Avadutha Tapovanam Trust and Sadanasramam Trust, Rep. by Dr.A.Pooranchandra Rao, S/o.Chinabasavayya, Age:74 R/o.Museum Road, Governor Pet, Vijayawada. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Prl. Secretary, Revenue (End.II) Department, A.P.Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner of Endowments, Endowments Department, Boggulakunta Tilak Road, Hyderabad-1. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.ASHOK ANAND KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents:AGP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled for a writ of certiorari to quash proceedings in Memo No.60370/E IV(1)/2001, dated 20.12.2001 of respondent No.1. This writ petition came up for hearing on earlier occasions and at the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the same was adjourned to enable the successor trustee to come on record to represent the petitioner trust in view of the death of the trustee. Dr. Avanigadda Surya Prakash, who claims to be the son of Dr. A.Poornachandra Rao, Original Trustee, who represented the petitioner in this writ petition, ﬁled WPMP.No.30970 of 2008. He claimed that by virtue of a Will executed by his father, he has become the trustee of the petitioner trust. Sri S.Ashok Anand Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly conceded that in order to be recognized as a trustee, the proposed applicant is required to get his status as a person from the founder family, declared by the competent authority under Section 87 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987. In my considered opinion, till such time, as the proposed applicant is not declared as the person from the founder family, he cannot represent the petitioner trust. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is dismissed as no person, who is authorized in law, is representing the petitioner trust as at the moment. Liberty is, however, given to Dr. Avanigadda Surya Prakash to avail a fresh remedy to question the proceedings, which are impugned in this writ petition on his getting recognized as the trustee of the petitioner trust. Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition, WPMP.No.30970 of 2008 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 12th NOVEMBER, 2008. kvni