The Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Subhash Reddy Writ Petition No.3052 of 2010 Order: In this Writ Petition, the petitioner has questioned proceedings, dated 4th February, 2010, in L.Dis.No.G1/5091/2010, issued by respondent No.1-Deputy Commissioner (Administration), Hyderabad, constituting an Utsav Committee, consisting 18 members, for smooth conduct of ensuing ‘Mahasivarathri’ festival on 12-02-2010, in Sri Kalyana Pothu Raju and Peddinti Amavari Temple, Cheemalapadu Village, Ravikavatam Mandal, Visakhapatam District. In the affidavit, filed in support of the Writ Petition, it is stated that the petitioner is a member of the founder family of the aforesaid temple and he was removed from the hereditary trusteeship on 03-02-2007. Hence, he filed O.A.No.41 of 2007, seeking declaration that he is a member of the founder family, and an interlocutory application seeking permission to perform Mahasivarathri festival in the aforesaid temple on 23-02-2009, before respondent No.2- Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Visakhapatnam. When no orders were passed on the said application, petitioner filed Revision Petition No.5 of 2009 before the Regional Joint Commissioner, Endowments Department, Kakinada, who disposed of the same on 14-02-2009, permitting the petitioner to perform Mahasivarathri festival in the aforesaid temple on 23-02-2009, pending the appeal. Thereafter, the impugned proceedings were issued by respondent No.3. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed this Writ Petition. Inasmuch as the application filed by the petitioner under Section 87 (H) of the Act, 30/87, seeking declaration that he is hereditary trustee of the aforesaid temple is still pending consideration before respondent No.1, petitioner cannot claim any preferential right to perform Mahasivarathri festival in the temple in question. Moreover, the members of the Utsav Committee, which is constituted for conduct of ensuing Mahasivarathri festival, are also not made parties to this Writ Petition. Though the learned Counsel for the petitioner has relied on a judgment of this Court reported in G.Rajendranath Goud vs. State of A.P., and others[1], the ratio decided in the said case would not render any assistance to the petitioner, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case. In that view of the matter, I do not find any illegality in proceedings, dated 4th February, 2010, in L.Dis.No.G1/5091/2010, issued by respondent No.1-Deputy Commissioner (Administration), Hyderabad. The Writ Petition is devoid of merits and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs. _________________ R.Subhash Reddy, J Date: 11th February, 2010 lur [1] 2006 (1) ALD 705