IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 8866 of 2008 Between: Smt.Chandrabhaga Bai W/o.late Satyanarayan R/o. 15-2-195, Maharajgunj, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of Endowments, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 2 The Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Hyderabad Circle, Boggulakunta, Hyderabad. 3 The Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Boggulakunta, Hyderabad. 4 Venugopal Inani S/o.Late Ram Prasad, 15-9-59, Maharajgunj, Hyderabad. 5 Rameshchandra Jhanwar S/o.Late Suresh Chandra Jhanwar, Maharajgunj, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in proceeding with the O.A.No.19/2003 pending before the authority though the application for transfer filed by the petitioner before the 1st respondent to transfer the OA.No.19/2003 from the file of the 2nd respondent to any other Deputy Commissioner is moved as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and contrary to the provisions of the Act and consequently direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the transfer application pending before the authority. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.C.B.RAM MOHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR} O R D E R:- This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus to declare the action of the 2nd respondent in proceeding with O.A.No.19 of 2003 though an application for transfer of O.A.No.19 of 2003 from the file of the 2nd respondent to any other Deputy Commissioner is moved by the petitioner before the 1st respondent, as arbitrary and illegal, and consequently direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the transfer application. The facts of the case in brief are that there is a dispute with regard to the declaration of founder trustees of Raghunathji Temple, Maharajgunj, Hyderabad and in that regard the 4th and 5th respondents filed O.A.No.19 of 2003 before the 2nd respondent-Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, wherein the petitioner is one of the respondents. As the petitioner apprehended bias, he filed an application under Section 132 of the Endowments Act, before the 1st respondent-Commissioner of Endowments seeking withdrawal of the O.A. from the file of the 2nd respondent and to transfer the same to any other Deputy Commissioner. Along with the said transfer application, the petitioner moved an application seeking stay of all further proceedings in O.A.No.19 of 2003. However, there is no progress in O.A.No.19 of 2003. Now, the grievance of the petitioner is that before the application for transfer of O.A.No.19 of 2003 is decided by the 1st respondent, the 2nd respondent-Deputy Commissioner of Endowments is trying to decide O.A.No.19 of 2003 itself. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material placed on record. In the normal circumstances, notices shall be issued to the 4th and 5th respondents, but as this Court is not deciding anything against these respondents and is only directing the Commissioner to decide the application for transfer of O.A.No.19 of 2003, notices to the 4th and 5th respondents are dispensed with. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the application for stay filed along with the transfer application, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and thereafter the transfer application filed under Section 132 of the Act may be decided within a period of six weeks. As it is apprehended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that O.A.No.19 of 2003 may be decided, this Court directs the 2nd respondent not to decide O.A.No.19 of 2003, till the application for stay of all further proceedings in O.A.No.19 of 2003 and the transfer application filed by the petitioner are decided. This entire exercise shall be done only after affording an opportunity to the 4th and 5th respondents of being heard. In terms of the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ 22.04.2008 Note: Issue operative portion by wire at party’s cost b/o bcj