Mr, T. Ravi, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

MR, T. RAVI,, S/O. MR. T. VENKATESU, AGED 51 YEARS, OCC: SERVER, S.V. ARTS COLLEGE HOSTEL, TIRUPATHI, R/O. D.NO.198-82A, R.C. ROAD, YADAVA COLONY, TIRUPATHI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶12

MR. T. GURAPPA,, S/O. MR. T. VENKATAPPA, AGED 52 YEAS, OCC: SERVER, S.V. ARTS COLLEGE HOSTEL, TIRUPATHI, R/O. D.NO.7120, SANTHI NAGAR, M.R. PALLI ROAD, TIRUPATHI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶13

MR. R. SEKHAR,, S/O. MR. R. RADHAKRISHNA SETTIYAR, AGED 54 YEARS, OCC: SERVER, S.V. ARTS COLLEGE HOSTEL, TIRUPATHI, R/O. D.NO.43, C. TAP, RAMNAGAR QUARTERS, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶14

MR. T. KRISHNAIAH,, S/O. MR. T. JERRABBA, AGED 54 YEARS, OCC: SERVER, S.V. ARTS COLLEGE HOSTEL, TIRUPATHI, R/O. D.NO.7-103, SANTHI NAGAR, M.R. PALLI ROAD, TIRUPATHI,

¶15

2

¶16

CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶17

MR. N. GOPAL REDDY,, S/O. MR. N. VENKATA REDDY, AGED 54 YEARS, OCC: SERVER, S.V. ARTS COLLEGE HOSTEL, TIRUPATHI, R/O. D.NO.2-92, PERUMALA PALLI, TIRUPATHI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶18

...PETITIONER(S)

¶19

AND

¶20

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (ENDOWMENTS -III) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶21

THE TIRUMALA TIRUPATHI DEVASTHANAMS, REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TIRUPATHI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶22

THE TIRUMALA TIRUPATHI DEVASTHANAMS MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, REP. BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TIRUPATHI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶23

THE SRI VENKATESWARA ARTS COLLEGE, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL, S.V. ART COLLEGE, TIRUPATHI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶24

THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF WARDEN, THE SRI VENKATESWARA ARTS COLLEGE, COLLEGE HOSTEL, TIRUPATHI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶25

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶26

3

¶27

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 toto issue a Writ, Order of Direction, more particularly one in the nature of 'Writ of Mandamus' declaring the inaction of the 2nd respondent in implementing the Memo No.8424/Endts-III/A1/05-05 dated 03-122005, issued by the 1st respondent, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, apart from violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to implement the Memo No.8424/Endts-III/A1/05-05 dated 03-12-2005, issued by the 1st respondent with letter and spirit and extend the service benefits to the petitioners herein, and pass

¶28

IA NO: 1 OF 2016(WPMP 49748 OF 2016

¶29

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 2nd respondent to consider the representation of the petitioners dated 13-04-2016 and pass appropriate orders, pending disposal of the main writ petition, and pass

¶30

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶31

1.K A NARASIMHAM

¶32

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶33

1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP)

¶34

2.C SRINIVASA BABA

¶35

3.A K JAYAPRAKASH RAO

¶36

The Court made the following:

¶37

4

¶38

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM

¶39

WRIT PETITION NO: 40380 of 2016

¶40

ORDER:-

¶41

This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for the following relief:

¶42

< to issue a Writ, Order of Direction, more particularly one in the nature of 'Writ of Mandamus' declaring the inaction of the 2nd respondent in implementing the Memo No.8424/Endts-III/A1/05-05 dated 03-12-2005, issued by the 1^st respondent, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, apart from violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to implement the Memo No.8424/EndtsIII/A1/05-05 dated 03-12-2005, issued by the 1^st respondent with letter and spirit and extend the service benefits to the petitioners herein, and pass .=

¶43

Case of the petitioners is that they were working on a temporary basis in various cadres in Sri Venkateswara Hostel College, Tirupati, prior to 03.06.1991. Upon their representation, 3^rd respondent passed Resolution No.192, dated 03.06.1991, to absorb them on a regular basis in the respective cadres and, accordingly, proceedings in Roc.No.1/SVACH/91, dated 19.08.1991, were issued and communicated to the petitioners. Several other hostel workers working in the hostels attached to the colleges under the management of Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams were also absorbed and extended the benefit of the Service Rules issued by 1^st respondent in G.O.Ms.No.1060, Revenue (Endowments-I) Department, dated 24.10.1981.

¶44

5

¶45

Pursuant to their representation, 2^nd respondent addressed a letter to the Secretary, Revenue (Endowments-III) Department, requesting approval for framing separate Service Rules for hostel workers in Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams hostels, through D.O.Roc.No.D4/38903/DEO/1994, dated 16.09.2002. Thereafter, the Government issued Memo No.8424/En.DtsIII/A1/05-5, dated 03.12.2005, wherein it was stated that the proposal for framing a separate set of Service Rules for hostel employees working in the hostels of the colleges under the management of Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams was not correct. It was further stated that since Service Rules already exist for employees working in various endowments institutions under G.O.Ms.No.1060, Revenue (Endowments-I) Department, dated 24.10.1989, as amended from time to time, it would be appropriate to amend the said rules by duly incorporating the proposed Service Rules of hostel employees. The Government, therefore, requested the authority to examine the entire issue keeping the above position in view and to take a specific decision by placing the matter before the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams Trust Board. The grievance of the petitioners now is that they are challenging the inaction on the part of respondent No.2 in implementing Memo No.8424/En.Dts-III/A1/055, dated 03.12.2005 issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh.

¶46

A counter came to be filed by 2^nd respondent stating that, vide Resolution No.192 dated 03.06.1991, the TTD Board approved the absorption of 139 hostel personnel of various cadres working in all TTD hostels, treating

¶47

6

¶48

them as a separate unit. Accordingly, 1^st respondent issued orders approving the above proposals vide G.O.Ms. No.673 dated 12.10.2001, thereby regularizing the services of the 139 hostel workers with effect from 03.06.1991.

¶49

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents/TTD. Perused the record.

¶50

Learned Standing Counsel for respondents/TTD placed a letter vide Roc.No.EDN4/TTD-80021(31)/33/2023-DEO-SEC-TTD, dated 12.02.2026, wherein Respondent No.2 has taken a specific stand that the Hostel Workers Union of TTD requested Respondent No.2 to strengthen the hostel establishment by increasing the supervisory cadre posts. Accordingly, a few posts in TTD hostels were identified. In view of the subsequent events and after taking into consideration the relevant facts and circumstances, including promotional channels and other possible avenues, Respondent No.2 proposed to submit comprehensive service rules as per the latest requirements, with the permission of the TTD Board, for obtaining necessary approval from the Government. In this context, they sought preparation and scrutiny of draft service rules for hostel employees, placing the same before the TTD Board for approval and thereafter forwarding them to the Government for appropriate orders, which process would take approximately four to six months.

¶51

7

¶52

In the light of the above undisputed position and for the reasons alike, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of W.P.No.42478 of 2018 with the following similar directions:-

¶53

(i) Petitioners shall submit a comprehensive representation covering their pleadings supported by the relevant documents and the judicial precedents, if any, to the Executive Officer of Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶54

(ii) The Executive Officer, in turn, shall place the same before the Board of Trustees as expeditiously as possible.

¶55

(iii) The Board of Trustees shall take a decision over the matter according to governing Rules and law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of representation of the petitioners.

¶56

(iv) Depending on the decision to be taken, the Board shall forward the proposal to the Government forthwith for getting necessary approval.

¶57

(V) Respondent No.1/Government is directed to consider the said proposal and take appropriate decision according to governing Rules and Law, within a period of three (3) months therefrom.

¶58