ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings dated 07.11.2025 issued in Rc.No.A1/4184/2019 by the respondent No.3 as illegal and arbitrary and for consequential relief.

2. Heard Sri Y.Srinivas Murthy, learned senior counsel appearing for Sri M.V.B.S. Narasimha Anudeep, learned counsel-on-record for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 and Sri M.V.Praveen Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No.5.

3. The brief facts of the case as averred in the writ affidavit are that Sri Ramalingeswara Swamy Temple situated at Medchal Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District (hereinafter referred to as the “subject temple”), was constructed by Sri Dhatrika Rajalingam, the petitioners’ great-grandfather, entirely with his personal funds; that for the maintenance and sustenance of the subject temple, he dedicated and endowed lands admeasuring Acs.17-09 gts situated in Sy.Nos.199, 508, 509, and 944 of Medchal Village; Sy.Nos.197 and 205 of Kesavaram Village; and Sy.Nos.113 and 126 of Attvelly Village, all situated within Medchal Mandal; that after his demise, the management of the temple was taken over by his son, Sri Veeranna; that after expiry of Sri Veeranna in the year 1945, the affairs of the temple were managed by Sri D.Sita Ram Balaji and Sri D.Kasinath until his death in 1960; that when Sri D.Sita Ram Balaji became incapacitated, his sons managed the affairs of the temple on his behalf; that subsequently, upon the death of Sri Harishankar in 1968, the son of Late D.Veeranna has given up his interest in management of the temple, as such, the petitioners’ father-D.Srinivas, succeeded to the management of the subject temple.

3.1. It is further averred that respondent No.3 by order dated 16.07.1993 passed in O.A.No.8 of 1993, declared the petitioners’ father as a founder member of the subject temple; that after the death of their father on 03.12.2009, the petitioners being his successors, have been continuously involved in the day-to-day affairs of the subject temple. The petitioners filed an application in O.A.No.1 of 2010 before the competent authority seeking to declare them as members of the founder family, which, on transfer to the Telangana Endowments Tribunal, was renumbered as O.A.No.707 of 2010, and stood dismissed, vide order dated 05.06.2017, holding that the OA is not maintainable and observed that it is open to the petitioners to approach competent appointing authority who is empowered to constitute the Trust Board. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners filed an application before respondent No.3. Upon due enquiry, respondent No.3, vide proceedings in Rc.No.A4/4184/2019 dated 04.04.2025, declared the petitioners as members of the founder family of the subject temple.

3.2. While the matter stood thus, respondent No.3–Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, without issuing any notice to the petitioners and without affording them any opportunity of hearing, illegally passed proceedings vide Rc.No.A4/4184/2019 dated 24.07.2025, cancelling the earlier declaration recognizing the petitioners as members of the founder family of the subject temple and passed orders in favour of respondent No.5. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners filed Writ Petition No.26036 of 2025 before this Court and the said Writ Petition was disposed of directing the respondent authorities to conduct enquiry by giving opportunity to interested persons including personal hearing and to pass orders in accordance with law.

3.3. Pursuant to the directions of this Court, respondent No.3 conducted fresh enquiry and passed order dated 07.11.2025 in Rc.No.A1/4184/2019, wherein the claims of the petitioners and respondent No.4 were rejected. The said order is impugned in the present Writ Petition.

4. Learned senior counsel for petitioners submitted that respondent No.3 failed to consider that respondent No.3 by order dated 16.07.1993 passed in O.A.No.8 of 1993 has alrea