IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 13733 of 2008 Between: V.Manohar Reddy @ V.Gowri Manohar Reddy,S/o.Chinna Venka Reddy Brahmanna Kraka(V) Jaladanki(M) Nellore District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Assistant Commissioner of Endowmetns Nellore 2 P.Subrahmanyam Inspector Endowments Department Kovur Nellore District Presently appointed as Fit Person Sri Venugopala Swamy temple Brahmana Kraka(V) Jaladanki(M) Nellore 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 will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned proceedings Rc No.A3/1392/2008 dt.16-6-2008 issued by the 1st respondent keeping the petitioner under suspension and appointing the 2nd respondent as Fit person of Sri Venugopala Swamy Temple Brahmanakraka(V) Jaladanki(M) Nellore District as illegal, arbitrary and consequently set aside the same and to and to grant such other relief or reliefs. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR. A.V.V.S.N.MURTHY Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.13733 OF 2008 ORDER : This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the proceedings of the 1st respondent - Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, dated 16.6.2008, under which the petitioner herein was kept under suspension and a fit person was appointed under Section 28 (3) of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions & Endowments Act, 1987 (for short, ‘the Act’) as arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner is one of the trustees of the 2nd respondent temple. In the elections held in the year 2007, he was also elected as Chairman. While so, on the basis of certain complaints received, the 1st respondent, under the impugned proceedings, dated 16.6.2008, while placing the petitioner under suspension pending enquiry in the charges framed against him ordered that the Inspector of the Endowments Department, Kovvur shall operate as fit person to the subject temple and to conduct public auction for lease of lands in accordance with rules. The said order is challenged before this Court on various grounds particularly on the ground that the impugned order which was passed without giving an opportunity to the petitioner to rebut the allegations is arbitrary and illegal. At the outset, it is to be noted that the impugned order was passed only as an interim measure pending enquiry contemplated under sub- section (2) of Section 28 of the Act. Hence, the same cannot be held to be bad for want of prior notice. However, it is brought to my notice by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though the impugned order was passed on 16.6.2008, so far the 1st respondent has not initiated any enquiry and no notice has been issued to the petitioner calling upon to submit his explanation. In the circumstances, though I am of the opinion that the impugned order dated 16.6.2008 does not warrant any interference, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to complete the enquiry initiated against the petitioner as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order after affording an opportunity to the petitioner to submit his explanation and after making necessary enquiry. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt.24.07.2008 gbs Note:- CC by 28.7.2008. (B/O) gbs