Y.Nageswara Rao, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.40769 of 2017 ORDER:

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.4 and 5. The petitioner was initially appointed as Attender in the fifth respondent's temple by proceedings of the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, Rajahmundry, dated 02.11.1981. His services were regularized thereafter and the pay scales were extended to him by proceedings of the third respondent dated 28.02.2000. He was deputed to work in the fourth respondent Choultry by proceedings dated 10.02.2011 and now when an order was passed by the second respondent on 16.11.2017 asking him to report for duty at the originally appointed place after completion of the period of deputation, the present Writ Petition is filed.

When the petitioner is admittedly appointed in the fifth respondent's temple, there cannot be any grievance for the petitioner to go to the fifth respondent. However, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the fifth respondent is not having sufficient income to pay the salary to the petitioner and the petitioner may not be paid salaries.

This Court noticed that the fifth respondent is a group of temples and it cannot be said that it has no financial capacity to pay the salaries to the petitioner. However, if salaries are not

paid to the petitioner, it is open to the petitioner to bring it to the notice of the concerned authorities.

The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of with the above observations. The miscellaneous petitions pending in this Writ Petition, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

________________________________ (A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J) 04.12.2017 vs