\ I '*4' APHC010312462025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 15981 OF 2025 Between: M. Sree Ramulu, S/o. late M. Narayana, Aged about 43 years, Presently working as Computer Operator, Sri Venkateswara Swamy Vari Devasthanam Dwaraka Tirumala, Eluru District, A.P. ...PETITIONER AND State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue(Endowments) Department, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. The Commissioner of Endowments, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Office at Gollapudi, Vijayawada, Krishna District, A.P. 3. Sri Venkateswara Swamy Vari Devasthanam, Dwaraka Tirumala, Eluru District, Rep. by its Executive Office 1. Secretariat Buildings, ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a direction or order, more particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus To declare the impugned proceedings Rc.No. C3/1364/2018 dated 06.06.2025 of 3"'^ Respondent as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and contrary to jurisprudence. To declare that the impugned order is not in consonance with the judgement in WP. No. 21894/2018 dated 21.04.2025 Consequently direct the Respondents to regularise his the post of Computer Operator in the cadre of Junior Assistant with effect from the date of vacancy arose in the cadre of Junior Assistant with all consequential benefits. I. service II; services in lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed 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 to reconsider and regularize the services of the Petitioner as Computer Operator in the cadre of Junior Assistant done in respect of similarly placed employees of other temples including Respondent No. 3 temple, pending disposal of Writ Petition, in the interest of justice and pass such other suitable orders. as was Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI BHARAT BABU.N Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS Counsel for the Respondent No.3: M/s. PULIPATI RADHIKA, SC FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following order: r APHC010312462^25 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3506] TUESDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 15981/2025 Between: 1.M SREE RAMULU, S/0. LATE M. NARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, PRESENTLY WORKING AS COMPUTER OPERATOR, SRI VENKATESWARA SWAMY VARI DEVASTHANAM TIRUMALA, ELURU DISTRICT, A.P. DWARAKA ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL REVENUE(ENDOWMENTS) SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI ANDHRA PRADESH. DEPARTMENT, GUNTUR DISTRICT, 2.THE COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, KRISHNA DISTRICT, A.P. OFFICE AT GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA, 3.SRI VENKATESWARA SWAMY VARI DEVASTHANAM, DWARAKA TIRUMALA, ELURU DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICE ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 tomay be pleased to issue a direction or order, more particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus i. To declare the impugned proceedings Rc.No. C3/1364/2018 dated 06.06.2025 of 3rd Respondent as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and contrary to service 2 jurisprudence, ii. To declare that the impugned order is not in consonance with the judgement in WP. No. 21894/2018 dated Consequently direct the Respondents to regularise his services in the post of Computer Operator in the cadre of Junior Assistant with effect from the date of vacancy arose in the cadre of Junior Assistant with all consequential benefits, iv. and pass such 21.04.2025 lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 may be pleased to direct the Respondents to reconsider and regularize the services of the Petitioner as Computer Operator in the cadre of Junior Assistant as was done in respect of similarly placed employees of other temples including Respondent No. 3 temple, pending disposal of Writ Petition, in the interest of justice and pass such other suitable orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.BHARAT BABU.N Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following: ORDER: The present writ petition assails impugned order dated 06.06.2025 passed by the 3'"^ respondent rejecting case of petitioner for regularization services to be illegal, arbitrary and in violation of principles of natural justice. 2. Petitioner is working as computer operator in the cadre of Junior Assistant with the 3'^^ respondent institution. He has initially approached this Court by filing writ petition vide W.P.No.21894 of 2018 seeking payment of minimum time scale of pay besides regularization of services and this Court, initially passed interim orders extending payment of minimum time scale of pay attached to the post of computer operator. Later, by final order dated 01.04.2025, with respect to the prayer of regularization, this Court granted liberty to the petitioner to submit representation to the respondents receipt of the same, the respondents were directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders according the governing rules and law within a period of three weeks. Petitioner stated to have made representation on 09.05.2025 and 3^ respondents to consider his case for regularization. Petitioner also stated to have placed various regularization orders passed by very same institution and as well as other institutions. However, by impugned proceedings dated 06.06.2025, a cryptic order came to be passed rejecting the case of the petitioner for regularization. Heard Sri P.Gangaiah Naidu, learned Senior Counsel of , upon nd to the 2 3. appearing on behalf of Sri N.Bharat Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments for 1®* and 2^^ respondents and Ms.Pulipati Radhika, learned Standing Counsel for 3'^'^ respondent. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for petitioner contends that the order is non speaking and the 3'^'^ respondent has not really applied his mind to the material placed on record, in particular various orders of regularization passed in identical circumstances, therefore, the impugned order cannot sustain. Learned Standing Counsel for the 3'^^ respondent, on the other hand, tried to justify the order passed by the 3'^'^ respondent by contending that the request of the petitioner has been rejected as the existing rules does not permit for regularization. 6. On consideration of the aforesaid submissions and a perusal of impugned proceedings, it transpires that the same does not provide for reasons, besides also does not refer to the rules which prohibit request for regularization. Further, the order also does not refer to the earlier regularization proceedings issued by very same respondent which are placed before this Court vide Exhibit P13 and also other orders passed by respective institutions vide Exhibit P15 & P17. As the order does not contain this Court finds that the same cannot sustain, therefore, impugned proceedings require to be set aside. Non furnishing of reasons would go to the root of the matter, as the petitioner is in service for considerable period of time, if his case for regularization is not being considered, the order should spell out specific reasons why he is denied the said benefit. 4. 5. any reasons 7. 5 IP 8. In view of the same, the impugned proceedings vide Rc.No.C3/1364/2018 dated 06.06.2025 is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded back to the 3'^'^ respondent for reconsideration of the request of the petitioner keeping in view of various proceedings under Exhibit PI3, PI5 and PI7 passed by respondents wherein in similar circumstances regularizations were affected and pass appropriate speaking orders within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order 9. as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- B. CHITTI JOSEPH ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ^SoFFICER SE To, The Principal Secretary, Revenue(Endowments) Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. The Commissioner of Endowments, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Office at Gollapudi, Vijayawada, Krishna District, A.P. Te Executive Office, Sri Venkateswara Swamy Vari Devasthanam, Dwaraka Tirumala, Eluru District. One CC to Sri Bharat Babu.N, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to M/s. Pulipati Radhika, SC for Endoements[OPUC] CCs to GP for Endowments, High Court of Andhra Pradesh 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Two 6. [OUT] Two CD Copies. 7. ssb '<p HIGH COURT DATED:01/07/2025 ORDER WP No.15981 OF 2025 O 1 5 JUL 2025 ml; O Oa 4, Current aeciion DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS