Wp/37863/2016 Of Income Tax Department Employees Saroornagar v. The State Of Telangana
High Court
04 Nov 2016 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Wp/37863/2016 Of Income Tax Department Employees Saroornagar v. The State Of Telangana
Date of order
04 Nov 2016
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp/37863/2016 Of Income Tax Department Employees Saroornagar v. The State Of Telangana, the High Court (2016) decided the matter.
Decision: With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO
WRIT PETITION No.37863 OF 2016
ORDER:
The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to declare the action of the respondents 2 and 3 in not taking into consideration the last wish of the Founder Trustee made under the registered Trust Deed and not appointing any of the members of the Managing Committee of the Income Tax Department Employees’ Saroornagar Cooperative House Building Society Limited to the Board of Trustees of Sri Prasanna Anjaneya Swamy Temple, Rama Krishna Puram, right from the date of taking over the administration and possession of the said temple by the 1[st] respondent, as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently, direct the respondents to strictly adhere to the recitals in the Registered Trust Deed.
Heard and perused the material available on record.
The petitioner is the President of Income Tax Department Employees’ Saroornagar Co-operative House Building Society Limited (for short ‘Society’), and the Society procured an extent of Acs.44.94 guntas of land in Saroornagar and constructed houses and also the Temple of Sri Prasanna Anjaneya Swamy. One Smt. M. Mahalaxmamma was made as Founder Trustee of the temple and as per the terms of the Trust, the daughter of Smt.M. Mahalaxamma would be Hereditary Trustee and the hereditary trustee shall be the trustee for life and after her, her eldest son shall be hereditary trustee, and thus the eldest male child from generation to generation shall be the hereditary trust, and one trustee shall be nominated by the Managing Committee of the Society. Subsequently, the temple was taken over by the Government. Right
from the date of taking over the said temple, the government has given go bye to the conditions stipulated in the Trust Deed and did not appoint any of the Managing Committee Members of Society as trustees as per the Trust Deed and appointing the political un-employees, who are unconnected with the colony and who are not even the residents of the colony. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 2[nd] respondent has issued notification, dated 06.08.2016, calling for applications from the interested applicants for appointment as Trust Board Members of the Temple, and that the petitioner and other members of the Society have made application, dated 09.09.2016, to the 2[nd ]respondent requesting to appoint any two of the members of the Society as the members of the Trust Board, but, the 2[nd] respondent, without considering the representation made by the petitioner and others, is proposing to appoint political persons as Members of the Trust Board.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the grievance of the petitioner, without expressing any opinion on merits, the 2[nd] respondent is directed to consider the application, dated 09.09.2016 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
______________ RAJA ELANGO, J
November 04, 2016. KTL
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.