( 1 ) SHRI Veerabhadra Swamy Temple, bonthapally, District Medak, represented by its Chairman, G. Bhadrappa, (for short vbs Temple ) seeks invalidation of the proceedings bearing Rc. No. G3/54994/2002 dated 7-3-2003 issued by the Deputy commissioner (S), Endowments department, Hyderabad-2nd respondent. The proceedings dated 7-3-2003 is in response to a representation made by the 3rd respondent herein and directs the writ petitioner-VBS Temple to pay the arrears of salary to the 3rd respondent upto february, 2003, immediately. A brief outline of the preceding facts requires to be recorded: (A) The impugned order is purportedly passed consequent on the orders of this court in W. P. No. 25133 of 2002. The 3rd respondent herein had earlier worked in VBS Temple upto 31-8-2001. Thereafter he was transferred to Sri Suryagiri yellamma Temple, Ravirala (v) (for short yellamma Temple with effect from 1-9-2001. At Yeliamma temple he drew salary for a period of ten (10) months with effect from 1-9-2001. As he was not paid any emoluments thereafter, he was relieved from Yellamma Temple and transferred to Sri veeranjaneya, ST. , Gattuppalli and he was given charge of both the temples. Admittedly, the 3rd respondent is not working at VBS temple since 1-9-2001. (b) As the petitioner was not paid salaries, he filed W. P. No. 24828 of 2002 challenging the action of the endowments Department in forcing him to handover charge to the person-in-Management of the VBS temple. By the judgment dated 14-8-2002, this court disposed of w. P. No. 24828 of 2002 directing the respondents therein to clarify to the petitioner from where and which authority he has to draw salary and to ensure the drawal of salary and payment of the same to him, within a week of the succeeding month. The judgment also recorded that an undenaking of the 3rd respondent herein, the petitioner therein, was required to be filed that he would handover the charge of the VBS temple. (c) Thereupon, the Commissioner of endowments issued a letter dated 23-11-2002 according permission to the 3rd respondent to take his salary from the VBS Temple characterizing the same as parent institution . Aggrieved by the order dated 23-11-2002, the petitioner herein filed W. P. No. 25133 of 2002. This court by the order dt. 7-1 -2003 suspended the order dt. 23-11 -2002 of the Commissioner of endowments. The 3rd respondent herein filed an application - w. V. M. P. No. 187 of 2003 seeking vacation of the interim suspension granted by this court. The said application was considered and by the order dated 31-1-2003, this court modified the interim order directing the Commissioner to reconsider the entire issue relating to the payment of the salary to the 3rd respondent herein within two (2) weeks. Thereupon, the 1st respondent-Commissioner issued the impugned order dated 7-3-2003. Admittedly, the 3rd respondent is not working as the person-in-Management or at all in the VBS Temple. He is not rendering any service thereat. It is neither pleaded, urged nor demonstrated before the Court that the properties, assets or incomes of all temples in the State, constitute one unit over which the 1st respondent or the State have an un-canalised control to direct the transfer or utilization from one institution to the other. The properties and income of each temple in the State or endowment is the property of that particular temple or endowment. The role of the State is limited to ensuring proper management of the properties and generation of reasonable income from such properties. The power of the State does not extend to interference with the religious activities or to alter the purposes for which endowments were made by philanthropic persons - endowments made to particular temples or institutions.

( 2 ) UNDER our constitutional scheme, the state is ordained a secular role . No funds are granted by the State to the religious institutions. In this perspective of the constitutional values, divers