HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI G.S. SINGHVI AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V. SEETHAPAHTY W.A. No.841 of 2006 Between: Smt. Agraharapu Tulasamma … Appellants. and The Assistant Commissioner Enowements Department, Vijayawada and others. … Respondents. :JUDGMENT: Counsel for the appellant : Sri S. Ashok Anand Kumar Counsel for the respondent No.1 : Government Pleader for Endowments. Counsel for the respondent No.2 : Government Pleader for Revenue. Counsel for the respondents 3 & 4 : Government Pleader Endowments. 11th August, 2006 Per G.S. Singhvi, CJ This appeal is directed against order dated 24.3.20005 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.6037 of 2005 whereby he directed the non-petitioners in the writ petition to consider the representation made by the writ petitioners for appointment of petitioner No.2 as member of the Trust Board of Sri Seetharama Swamy Vari Devasthanam, Enikepadu, Vijayawada rural Mandal, Krishna District and decide the same within two weeks. On the last date of hearing i.e., 7.8.206, we had enquired from the learned counsel for the appellant, whether the direction given by the learned Single Judge has been complied with and the competent authority has passed appropriate order on the representation made by the petitioners for appointment of Petitioner No.2 as member of the Trust Board. Today, the learned counsel gave out that he has been informed by the advocate appearing for the appellant in the lower Court that the representation made by the writ petitioners was rejected by the competent authority. In view of the above development, the appeal is disposed of as infructuous. As a sequel to disposal of the main appeal as infructuous, WAMP.NO.1732 of 2006 is also disposed of as infructuous. However, liberty is given to the appellant to apply for revival of the writ appeal if it is found that information conveyed to the learned counsel for the appellant is factually incorrect. G.S. SINGHVI, CJ 11th August, 2006 G. V. SEETHAPATHY, J vtv