\ APHC010047172022 IN the high court of ANDHRA AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY . TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY PRESENT the honourable smt justice WRIT PETITir>M MQ. 337Q PRADESH OF JULY FIVE kiranmayee mandava Between: R V. Seshaiah Sharma, ‘ Mahanandeeswara Swamy Vari S/o. Atchaiah, Aged 59 I Devasthanam, Mahanandi, years, Occ: Archaka in Sri j Kurnool District -PETITIONER AND 'I- The State of Andhra Revenue Pradesh, Rep. by its Special (Endowments) Department, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Commissioner, Chief Secretary, Velgapudi, Secretariat, Endowments Department, Gollapudi, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 3. Sri Mahanandeeswara ‘ District Rep. by its Executive Swamy Vari Devasthanam, - Officer Mahanandi, Kurnool -RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ^ the Constitution of India mstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith pleased to issue an appropriate Writ order in the nature of Writ of Mandamus praying that in the the High Court may be particularly, one or direction more declaring the acfion of the 3-respondent Pew,on No.101/1993 to set aside the Memo as bad Illegal, arbitrary, absurd, violative of in not deciding the Revision No.B/43/83 dated 29-5 principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the Memo dated 29-5-1987. lA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 direct the 3'“ respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 22-7-2021 in terms of the complainant's letter dated 30-12-2016. to Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI D. V. SASIDHAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2:GP FOR ENDOWMENTS Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI T. VENU GOPAL SC FOR ENDOWMENTS (RAYALASEEMA REGION) The Court made the following order: 1^; APHC010047172022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] FRIDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 3379 OF 2022 Between: 1.R.V. SESHAIAH SHARMA, S/0. ATCHAIAH, AGED 59 YEARS, OCC. ARCHAKA IN SRI MAHANANDEESWARA SWAMY VARI DEVASTHANAM, MAHANANDI, KURNOOL DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY, REVENUE (ENDOWMENTS) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. SRI MAHANANDEESWARA SWAMY VARI DEVASTHANAM MAHANANDI, KURNOOL DISTRICT REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: Counsel for the Respondent(S): D VSASIDHAR G RAMANA RAO GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following: Heard Sri D.V.Sasidhar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Sri T.Venu Gopal, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.3. 2 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 3'“ respondent is not deciding the Revision Petition No. 101 of 1993 Additional Commissioner, Endowments Department. pursuant to the directions of the 3. It IS contended that the petitioner was appointed as an archaka 18.06.1985 on payment of consolidated on wages. Subsequently pay scale was extended. He filed writ petition(s) seeking UDC scales and to pay regular scales on par with similarly situated pending. However, the petitioner was removed from dated 29.05.1987 on a complaint stated to have been filed persons. The same are stated to be service vide proceedings by the petitioner’s wife. The said dismissal was subject matter of a Revision Petition, and the same was dismissed on 18.07.1991. Challenging the order passed in revision petition, the petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court and the disposed of on 10.11.1993, granting liberty to the petitioner before the Commissioner of Endowments. The Revision thus filed same was to file revision was also dismissed. Challenging the said order again a writ petition in W.P.No. 16920 of 2002 was filed. The said writ petition was dismissed. Against the dismissal of the writ petition, the petitioner herein filed writ appeal in W.A.No.1692 of 2003 taken up by the Additional Commissioner of the Endowments Department. The Writ appeal was disposed of directing the revisional authority to dispose of the revision petition within three months. The Additional Commissioner order dated 26.10.2004, disposed of the Revision Petition directing the 3^'^ respondent to re-enquire into the matter and vide pass appropriate orders in accordance with law after giving an opportunity to all the parties. Till such time 3 the order of the High Court dated 21.10.2003 in W.A.No.1692 of 2003 would continue to operate. It is further contended that it has been more than 20 years since the matter has been remanded to the 3'^'^ respondent. However, the 3'^'^ respondent did not pass appropriate orders pursuant to the remand. The petitioner has approached the authority brining to their notice the compromise that was entered into by him with his wife and the subsequent demise of the petitioner’s wife. However no orders have been passed. Hence the writ petition. 4. The 3'"^ respondent filed counter-affidavit stating he has joined recently 5. rd and the issue is pertaining to the year and issue is pending before the 3 respondent. 6. Having regard to the submissions, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 3'^^ respondent to pass appropriate orders after taking into consideration the representations of the petitioner, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Till such time, the following observations made by the Additional Commissioner while disposing of the revision petition would continue: Till such a decision is taken by the respondent, the orders of the High Court, dated 21.10.2003 in W.A.No.1692 of 2003 shall continue to operate’ 4 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// (^^FFICER SECTI To, 1. The Special Chief Secretary, Revenue (Endowments) Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velgapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Commissioner, Endowments Department, Gollapudi, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 3. The Executive Officer, Devasthanam, Mahanandi, Kurnool District. Sri Mahanandeeswara Swamy Vari 4. One CC to Sri D. V. Sasidhar, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Sri T. Venu Gopal, SC for Endowments (Rayalaseema Region) [OPUC] 6. One CC to Sri G. Ramana Rao, SC for Endowments[OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP for Endowments, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 8. Two CD Copies. ssb ■f- HIGH COURT DATED:18/07/2025 ORDER WP No.3379 OF 2022 ^ 0 I AUG 2025 gntSectjp fATCtiL 3- DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS