HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.29118 of 2009 Dated: 24-02-2010 Between: Bathula Kondaiah. … Petitioner And The State of A.P., rep. by the Principal Secretary, Revenue (Endowments-I) Department & others. … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.29118 of 2009 ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the orders issued by the Government, in Memo No.54413/Endts.1(1)/2009-I, dated 15.12.2009, whereby, directions were issued to continue the 5th respondent as Manager of the 6th respondent-temple. 2. The 5th respondent herein is a Clerk of the 6th respondent- temple. He was given authorization to discharge the duties as a Manager of the temple, as contemplated under Section 29 of the A.P.Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987. The Commissioner, referring to certain reports of the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Guntur, passed orders in Rc.No.E3/26171/2006-2, dated 21.11.2009, withdrawing the authorization given to the 5th respondent to work as a Manager. As against the same, the 5th respondent has approached the Government by way of representation/revision. Through the impugned order, dated 15.12.2009, passed in Memo No.54413/Endts.1(1)/2009-1, the 1st respondent-Government has ordered continuance of the 5th respondent-applicant as a Manager of the subject temple. 3. In this writ petition, it is the case of the petitioner that serious charges are pending against respondent No.5, and in that view of the matter, he is not entitled to be continued as a Manager of the temple. It is also contended that there is no such sanctioned post of Manager, in view of the amendment made to Section 29 of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987. 4. The impugned order is only in the nature of an interim order passed by the Government, on the application/revision filed by respondent No.5. If the petitioner is having any objections for continuation of 5th respondent as Manager, he can place the same before the Government for modification of the order, dated 15.12.2009. In view of pendency of proceedings before the Government, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, permitting the petitioner to make a representation before the Government, placing on record the supporting material, showing that there are allegations against respondent No.5, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If such representation is filed along with supporting material, the 1st respondent-Government shall look into the same and take a decision either to continue the 5th respondent as a Manager of the 6th respondent-temple in terms of the Memo, dated 15.12.2009, or to implement the order, dated 21.11.2009, of the Commissioner of Endowments and pass appropriate orders, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of representation from the petitioner. 5. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 24th February 2010 ajr