As per case facts, the petitioner, an Archaka of Sri Uma Maheswara Swamy Vari Temple, sought to construct a residential quarter on a Mandapam within the temple premises, which he ... alleged was unauthorizedly occupied and commercially misused by the 6th respondent Sangham. The petitioner further challenged the exemption granted to the 6th respondent from the Endowments Act for Sri Vasavi Kanyaka Parameswari Ammavari temple, claiming it was a sub-deity of the main temple and not an independent entity. The respondents contended that the two temples were distinct and separately managed. The question arose whether the petitioner had the locus standi to challenge the exemption granted to the 6th respondent and if the sub-deity temple could be considered independent. Finally, the High Court ruled that the petitioner, as an Archaka of the main temple, lacked the locus standi to challenge the exemption. Consequently, both Writ Petitions were dismissed, and any pending interlocutory applications were closed.