Akaveeti Ranganayakulu, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Akaveeti Ranganayakulu, S/o. Naga Raju, Hindu. Male, aged 33 years Working as Barber in Sri Nemaligundla Ranganayaka Swamy Temple (Employee Code No.7188) J.Pullalacheruvu Racherla Mandal Prakasam District.

¶12

Akaveeti Venkata Prasad, S/o. Seshayya, Hindu, Male, aged 40 years, Working as Barber in Sri Nemaligundla Ranganayaka Swamy Temple, (Employee Code No.7189) J.Pullalacheruvu, Racherla Mandal, Prakasam District.

¶13

Akaveeti Srinivasulu, S/o. Seshayya, Hindu, Male, aged 43 years. Working as Barber in Sri Nemaligundla Ranganayaka Swamy Temple, (Employee Code No.719.0) J. Pullalacheruvu, Racherla Mandal, Prakasam District.

¶14

Kanumarla Nemaligundam, S/o. Venkata Rangayya, Hindu, Male, aged 57 years. Working as Barber in Sri Nemaligundla Ranganayaka Swamy Temple, (Employee Code No.7194) J. Pullalacheruvu, Racherla Mandal, Prakasam District.

¶15

Kanumarla Ranga Swamy, S/o. Chinna Tirupathi, Hindu, Male, aged 36 years, Working as Barber in Sri Nemaligundla Ranganayaka Swamy Temple, (Employee Code No.7195) J. Pullalacheruvu, Racherla Mandal, Prakasam District.

¶16

r>

¶17

Kanumarla Ranga Swamy, S/o. Ranga Sai Hindu,Male, Aged 57 years. Working as Barber in Sri Nemaligundia Ranganayaka Swamy Temple, (Employee Code No.9251) J. Pullalacheruvu, Racherla Mandal, Prakasam District.

¶18

...PETITIONERS

¶19

AND

¶20

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, (Endowments), A.P Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravthi, Guntur District.

¶21

The Commissioner, Endowments Department, A.P., Gollapudi, Vijayawada, Krishna District.

¶22

Regional Joint Commissioner, Endowments Department, Multi Zone-ll, Hathiramji Math, Tirupathi, Chittor District.

¶23

Sri Nemaligundia Ranganayaka Swamy Temple, Rep. by its Executive Officer, Sri Nemaligundia Ranganayaka Swamy Temple, Pullalacheruvu, Racherla Mandal, Prakasam District.

¶24

...Respondents

¶25

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly^{oneinthenatureof} WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the of the respondents 1 to 4 in not extending the benefit of the time scale to the petitioners in the 4 th respondent temple for their posts as barbers, pursuant to the orders of the Honourable Apex Court in State of Punjab and others vs. Jagjit Singh and others reported in 2017 (1) SCC 148 and consequential circular in Rc.No.A1/1726091/2018 Dt. 24.09.2018 issued by the 2"^^ Respondent as illegal arbitrary improper unjust violative of Articles 14 19 (1) (g) and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 4‘^ respondent to implement the circular in Rc.No.A1/1726091/2018 Dt.24.09.2018 and grant all consequential benefits including back wages and grant such other relief or

¶26

reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶27

lA No: 1 OF 2020

¶28

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 1 to 4 to extend the minimum time scale to the petitioners to their respective posts in the 4“^ respondent temple as per circular in Rc.No.A1/1726091/2018 Dt; 24.09.2018 by duly considering their representation dt: 24.11.2019 pending disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI MANGENA SREE RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR REVENUE

¶29

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI M. SRINIVASA RAO, SC FOR ENDOWMENTS PALNADU, PRAKASAM & SPSR NELLORE

¶30

The Court made the following order:

¶31

APHC010231142020

¶32

[3458]

¶33

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶34

FRIDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶35

PRESENT

¶36

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶37

WRIT PETITION NO: 15232/2020

¶38

Between:

¶39

1.AKAVEETI RANGANAYAKULU,, S/O. NAGA RAJU, HINDU, MALE, AGED 33 YEARS, WORKING AS BARBER IN SRI NEMALIGUNDLA RANGANAYAKA SWAMY TEMPLE, (EMPLOYEE CODE N0.7188) J. PULLALACHERUVU, RACHERLA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

¶40

2.AKAVEETI VENKATA PRASAD,, S/O SESHAYYA, HINDU, MALE, AGED 40 YEARS, WORKING AS BARBER IN SRI NEMALIGUNDLA RANGANAYAKA SWAMY TEMPLE, (EMPLOYEE CODE N0.7189) J. PULLALACHERUVU, RACHERLA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT

¶41

3.AKAVEETI SRINIVASULU,, S/O. SESHAYYA, HINDU, MALE,^AGED43 YEARS, WORKING AS BARBER IN SRI NEMALIGUNDLA RANGANAYAKA SWAMY TEMPLE, (EMPLOYEE CODE NO.719.0)^J. PULLALACHERUVU, RACHERLA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

¶42

4.KANUMARLANEMAL1GUNDAM,, S/O. VENKATA RANGAYYA, HINDU, MALE, AGED 57 YEARS, WORKING AS BARBER IN SRI NEMALIGUNDLA RANGANAYAKA SWAMY TEMPLE, (EMPLOYEE CODE N0.7194) J. PULLALACHERUVU, RACHERLA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

¶43

5.KANUMARLA RANGA SWAMY, S/O. CHINNA TIRUPATHI, HINDU, MALE, AGED 36 YEARS, WORKING AS BARBER IN SRI NEMALIGUNDLA RANGANAYAKA SWAMY TEMPLE, (EMPLOYEE CODE NO.7195) J. PULLALACHERUVU, RACHERLA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

¶44

6.KANUMARLA RANGA SWAMY,, S/O. RANGA SAI, HINDU,MALE, AGED 57 YEARS, WORKING AS BARBER IN SRI NEMALIGUNDLA RANGANAYAKA SWAMY TEMPLE, (EMPLOYEE CODE NO.9251) J. PULLALACHERUVU, RACHERLA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT

2

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL

¶49

SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

¶50

(ENDOWMENTS), A.P SECRETARIAT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVTHI,

¶51

GUNTUR DISTRICT

¶52

2.THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT A.P.

¶53

GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT

¶54

REGIONAL JOINT COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, CHITTOR

¶55

DISTRICT^*^^'"’ '^ATH, TIRUPATHI,

¶56

SRI NEMALIGUNDLARANGANAYAKASWAMY TEMPLE REP BY ITS SWAMv™" nemaligundla RANGAN^

¶57

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶58

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the c rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed fherewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a writ, order or direction more partidiriy one in he nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the of the re pendents 1 to 4 in not extending the benefit of the time scale ot the petitioners in the 3rd respondent temple for their posts as barbers pursuant to Jagji Singh and others reported in 2017 (1) SCC 148 and consequentialvs. circular in Rc.No. A1/1726091/2018 Dt. 24.09.2018 issued by1“ fmlment ^°nscquently direct the 3rd respondent to implement the circular in Rc.No. A1/1726091/2018 Dt. 24.09.2018 and grant alreliefsconsequentialas this HonblebenefitsCourtincluding back wages and grant such other relfef or' may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case

¶59

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶60

in Ihn ‘he circumstances stated LtoasedT rt'' 'he High Court may be pleased thfoemtllT, 3 extend the minimum time scale to the petittioners to their resepective posts in the 4th respondent temple as per circular in Rc.No. A1/1726091/2018 Dt: 24.09.2018 by duly considering their representation dt; 24.11.2019 pending disposal of the writ petition and to pass

¶61

3

¶62

lANOilOF 2024

¶63

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to grant leave to file the reply affidavit to the counter of the Respondents in W.P.No. 15232 of 2020 in the interests of the justice and pass Counsel for the Petitloner(S):

¶64

MANGENA SREE RAMA RAO

¶65

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶66

1.GPFOR REVENUE

¶67

2.MEKAPOTHUl_A SRINIVASA RAO SC FOR ENDOWMENTS PALNADU PRAKASAM AND SPSR NELLORE

¶68

3. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS

¶69

The Court made the following:

¶70

ORDER:-

¶71

Heard Sri Mangena Sree Rama Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant uovernment rieader for tndowrnents.

¶72

The instant writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents to grant minimum time scale of salary to the petitioners-of-tht?®respendent temple. It is contended that the petitioners are working as Barbers in the 4 respondent temple. The grandfather(s) of the petitioners had also worked as Barbers in the subject temple. The petitioners are now being paid consolidated salary of Rs. 13,000/- per month. It is contended that although they have been working for 27 years, they have been paid meager salaries and the nature of their job is perennial.

¶73

Learned counsel for the petitioners relies on the decision^ofthe Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab and Others Vs. Jagjit

¶74

4

¶75

Singh and Others ^ , contends that the petitioners are entitled for regularization and minimum time scale.

¶76

The Learned counsel further relies on the Circular issued by the 2"^ respondent dated 24.09.2018. The said Circular was issued pursuant to the judgement of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab and Others Vs. Jagjit Singh and Others,. It has been inter-alia provided under the said Circular that;

¶77

“11. As far as the Archakas, Paricharikas and other religious employees, already working on Contract/Consolidated salary basis, in 6(a) temples are concerned, to the extent possible the remunerations shall be paid as follows:

¶78

	Paricharikas & Talihaswamy	Archaka Parayanadars Purohits / Pandits and other religious staff with various nomenclature.
For those who have completed 5 years of service	13,000/-pm	15,000/-pm
For those who have completed 10 years of service	15,000/-pm	17,000/-pm
For those who have completed 15 years of service	18,000/-pm	20,000/-pm
For those who have completed 20 years of service	20,000/-pm	25,000/-pm

¶79

Having regard to the said circular, learned counsel for the

¶80

petitioner prays the Court that since the petitioners^{arealsoconsideredas} religious employees, they are entitled for remuneration as prescribed under

the said circular.

2017 (1) see 148

lA

5

A perusal of the circular referred supra, it would appear that the same was issued pursuant to the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of the State of Punjab and Others Vs. Jagjit Singh and Others. The contention of the petitioners is that they form part of the religious staff of the temple, therefore the circular in all force would apply to their case for grant of Minimum Time Scale. Having regard to the said contention of the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the respondents are under an obligation to pass appropriate orders with regard to the relief sought by them.

¶86

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the 2 respondent to pass appropriate orders in terms of the circular in RC.NO.A1/1726091/2018, Dt.24.09.2008. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶87

As a sequel, interlocutory applications, pending if any, shall stand

¶88

closed.

¶89

//TRUE COPY//

¶90

Sd/- K TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR / SECTION OFFICER

¶91

To,

¶92

The Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue Department,

¶93

(Endowments), State of Andhra Pradesh Secretariat Velagapudi,

¶94

Amaravthi, Guntur District.

¶95

The Commissioner, Endowments Department, A.P., Gollapudi,

¶96

Vijayawada, Krishna District.

¶97

The Regional Joint Commissioner, Endowments Department, Multi Zone-ll, Hathiramji Math, Tirupathi, Chittor District.

¶98

The Executive Officer, Sri Nemaligundia Ranganayaka Swamy Temple, Sri Nemaligundia Ranganayaka Swamy Temple, Pullalacheruvu, Racherla Mandal, Prakasam District.

¶99

One CC to Sri Mangena Sree Rama Rao, Advocate [OPUC]

¶100

Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] Two CCs to GP for Endowments, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] One CC to Sri M.Srinivasa Rao, SC for Endowments, Palnadu prakasam & SPSR Nellore.[OPUC]

¶101