ORDER : VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents, more particularly Respondent No. 2, to consider the Petitioners representation dated 31.12.2025 in respect of Sri Dandumaremma Devasthanam, Kambaladinne Village, Mylavaram Mandal, Y.S.R. Kadapa District, strictly in accordance with law and by following the due process mandated under the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987, and the ratio laid down by this Honble Court in Allaparthi Venkata Chalapathi Rao vs. State of AP, as complied with by the State of AP vide G.O.Ms.No. 298 (Gazette Notification No.G.396 dated 7 th July, 2023 and pass such other order.” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s committee along with the support of the so many devotees, villagers and along with common good fund sanctioned by the respondent No.1, got constructed the respondent No.5/ temple and it has been maintaining all these years without there being any appointment of Executive Officer. While so, now, the respondent authorities i.e., respondent Nos. 2 to 4, considered the status and income of the temple and got appointed an executive officer to control and to maintain the entire affairs of the respondent No.5/ temple. The learned counsel submits that the Executive Officer who was appointed by the respondent authorities was not maintaining the temple as required and as wished by the devotees and villagers, more particularly, the petitioner committee. Having no other option, the petitioner committee submitted a representation dated 31.12.2025 to the respondent No.2 herein, requesting to exempt appointment of an Executive Officer and Trust Board Committee for Dandu Maremma Thalli Temple, Kambaladinne Village, Mylavaram Mandal, YSR Kadapa District and pleading to hand over the control and maintenance of the temple to the petitioner committee even though the temple is having income of more than Rs.5 Lakhs for common good and for further development of the temple. Even after receipt of said representation, till date, the respondent No.2, neither considered and granted exemption nor replied by way of any proceedings. Hence, the Writ Petition. 4. Even after receipt of said representation, till date, the respondent No.2, neither considered and granted exemption nor replied by way of any proceedings. Hence, the Writ Petition. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent temple/ respondent No.5 furnished written instructions, wherein, it is specifically stated that the temple is getting an income of more than Rs.5 Lakhs. It is further stated that for the financial year 2024-2025 the income fetched to the temple is Rs.6,12,069/- and similarly, for the year 2025-2026 it is Rs.8,81,130/- and year by year it is increasing. He further submits that as per the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (Act 30 of 1987), once the income of the temple is more than Rs.5 Lakhs which was notified under Section 6 of the Act 30 of 1987, the respondent No.2 is under the statutory obligation to appoint executive officer to control and maintain the affairs of the particular notified temple. In view of the same, the representation dated 31.12.2025 submitted by the petitioner cannot be considered in view of the provisions of the Act 30 of 1987. 5. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of the material placed on record and more particularly, the written instructions furnished on record, it is an admitted fact that the petitioner’s committee was constituted only for the development of the respondent No.5/ temple with the support of the devotees, villagers. Since then, the subject temple has been developed and maintained by the petitioner committee but on the guise that the income of the temple is increased to more than Rs.5 lakhs, the authorities took steps and appointed an Executive Officer. As contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, if the subject temple is under the supervision of the petitioner’s committee, the temple would have been developed more and more than in the control of Executive Officer is to be considered by the authorities in public spirit and in the interest of temple and after getting due enquiry from the stakeholders. 6. 6. In view of the facts and reasons as stated above, this Court is inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition, directing the respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated 31.12.2025 submitted by the petitioner’s committee and pass appropriate orders after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as other stake holders, if any, including executive officer of respondent No.5/ temple, within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed.