JUDGMENT The subject matter of the writ petition is a temple situated at Kudiyaghat, Lucknow, on the banks of the Gomti River. 2. An earlier writ petition was filed before this Court (Misc. Bench No.12203 of 2014) on the apprehension that the district administration was taking certain actions which would interfere with the activities or work being carried out in the temple. In the order of the Division Bench dated 11 December 2014, the Court recorded the statement, on instructions of the Additional Advocate General, that there was no endevour or intention to interfere with the temple or the activities or work being carried out. The petition was, accordingly, disposed of. 3. The present petition has been filed with an averment that on 6 February 2016 and 23 March 2016 when the work of plastering and whitewashing was being carried out, the police authorities interfered with the work and directed the Pujari to cease and desist from doing so. On 12 April 2016, this Court recorded the grievance of the petitioner, as set out in paragraphs 10 and 11 of the writ petition, which read as follows: "10. That on 6th February 2016 pujari of the temple with the financial help of devotees started repair work (plastering, white washing etc) of the walls of the temple as well Sanctum/Santorum during repair work was going on, in the meantime at about 9: 45 am Sri Sanjeet Sonkar, Chowking Incharge Roomogate Police Chowki PS Chowk entered in the Sanctum/Santorum of the temple and forcefully stopped the work and abused the pujari. 11. That on 23.03.2016 at about 2.15 PM Sri Chotte Lal Mishra Sub Divisional Magistrate alongwith police chowki incharge Rumi Gate asked the pujari the petitioner No.3 to leave the temple otherwise he will face dare other consequences. He also directed to pujari not to carry any repairing work, white washing etc in Gyaneshwar Mahadeve Mandir." 4. Specifically, with reference to the aforesaid grievance, the instructions which have been made available to the learned Standing Counsel by the Additional City Magistrate, Lucknow have been placed on the record. He also directed to pujari not to carry any repairing work, white washing etc in Gyaneshwar Mahadeve Mandir." 4. Specifically, with reference to the aforesaid grievance, the instructions which have been made available to the learned Standing Counsel by the Additional City Magistrate, Lucknow have been placed on the record. The instructions state that the Pujari was instructed to ensure that no fresh work of development takes place at the temple (in the absence of the permission of the competent authority), but there was no effort to interfere with the work of renovation such as plastering and whitewashing which is to be carried out in the sanctum sanctorum of the temple. 5. In view of the assurance which has been placed on record and having due regard to the nature of the statement which has been made on behalf of the petitioners in regard to the work which is being carried out, as stated above, no further directions are necessary in these proceedings. 6. The petition is, accordingly, disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.