IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 14019 of 2008 Between: 1.Kuchuri Srinivasa Reddy S/o. Rami Reddy R/O. Rangadham, Mogiligadda Village, Farooqnagar Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. 2.Smt. Kuchuri Pentamma W/o. Rami Reddy R/O. Rangadham, Mogiligadda Village, Farooqnagar Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. ..... PETITIONERS AND Sri Ranganayaka Swamy Temple, Mogiligadda Village, Farooqnagar Mandal, Mahabubnagar, rep. by its Manager. .....RESPONDENT 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 a writ, order or direction, more particularly a writ in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Manager of Sri Ranganayaka Swamy Temple, Mogiligadda Village, Farooqnagar Mandal, Mahabubnagar Districtt in trying to evict the petitioner from the land admeasuring an extent of Acs.6-00 in Sy.No.26, belonging to the respondent temple as bad, illegal, arbitrary and oppose to law. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.M.VIDYASAGAR Counsel for the Respondent: CH.SATISH KUMAR,SC FOR ENDOWNMENTS, TELANGA The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON’BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI Writ Petition No.14019 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the alleged action of the Manager of the respondent- temple in trying to evict the petitioners from the land admeasuring Acs.6.00 in Survey No.26, Mogiligidda Village, Farooqnagar Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District, is arbitrary and illegal. When the matter is taken up for consideration, Sri Ch.Satish Kumar, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent, under instructions, stated that the alleged interference is incorrect and the respondent is not interfering with the possession of the petitioners in any manner whatsoever. In the circumstances, no further enquiry is necessary in the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of recording the statement of the learned counsel for the respondent that the respondent-temple is not interfering with the possession of the petitioners in respect of the land in question in any manner whatsoever. No costs. _______________ 02.07.2008 Note: Issue CC in two days. (b/o) VGB