1 APHC010702402022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] THURSDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 41481/2022 Between: 1. KOLI KANDADAI SREENIVASA PRASADACHARYULU, S/O (LATE) RAMANUJA SWAMY AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, WORKING AS UPA PRADHANA ARCHAKA SRI VARAHA LAKSHMI NARASIMHA SWAMY TEMPLE, SIMHACHALAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE (ENDOWMENTS) DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P 2. THE CORNMISIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT. 3. SRI VARAHA LAKSHMI NARASIMHA SWAMY VARI DEVASTHANAM, REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER SIMHACHALAM, VISAKHAPATNAM 4. GODAVARTHI SRINIVASACHARYULU, S/O GODAVARTHI VENKATACHARYULU, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, WORKING AS PRADHANA ARCHAKA SRI VARAHA LAKSHMI NARASIMHA SWAMY VARI DEVASTHANAM, SIMHACHALAM, VISAKHAPATNAM 5. I V RAMANACHARYULU, S/0 (LATE) VENKATACHARYULU, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, WORKING AS PRADHANA ARCHAKA SRI VARAHA LAKSHMI NARASIMHA SWAMY VARI DEVASTHANAM, SIMHACHALAM, VISAKHAPATNAM 2 ...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 topleased to issue Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in promoting the respondents 4 and 5 as Pradhana Archaka in Sri Varaha Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy vari Devasthanam. through proceedings Rc.No.B2/6339/2007-1and2, dt.18.09.2022, basing on the final seniority list dt.12.09.2022, without considering the petitioner's objections dt.27.06.2022, without taking into consideration of the eligibility criteria of respondents 4 and 5 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of Art. 14, 16 of Constitution of India, apart from violation of principles of natural justice and set aside the same consequently to promote the petitioner to the post of Pradhana Archaka with effect from 23-03-2022 and to pay all consequential benefits attached to the post and to pass IA 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 For the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of the above Writ Petition it is hereby prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the Rc.No.B2/6339/2007-1and2, dt.18.09.2022 in effected the promotion of the 4th and 5th respondents as .Pradhana Archaka in Sri Varaha Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy vari Devasthanam. pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit just and proper in the circumstances of the case. IA 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 grant leave to the respondent No.2 in the Writ petition No. 41481 of 2022 to file counter affidavit in the above writ petition and pass IA NO: 2 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 grant leave to petitioner to file counter affidavit and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 3 1. V V N NARAYANA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. CHINTAPALLI SRINIVAS 2. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS 3. D V SASIDHAR The Court made the following: ORDER:- Heard Sri V.V.N. Narayana Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner; the learned Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for respondent Nos.1 & 2; Sri Chintapalli Srinivas, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.3; and Sri D.V. Sasidhar, learned counsel for respondent No.4 2. The challenge in the Writ Petition is to the action of the 3rd respondent in promoting respondent Nos.4 & 5 (deceased) as “Pradhana Archaka in Sri Varaha Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Vari Devasthanam”, through proceedings Rc.No.B2/6339/2007-1&2, dated 18.09.2022, based on the final seniority list dated 12.09.2022, without considering the petitioner’s objections dated 27.06.2022. 3. It is contended that the final seniority list was issued without considering the petitioner’s objections dated 27.06.2022 against the Provisional Seniority List dated 20.06.2022, issued by the 3rd respondent. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was initially appointed as Archaka in the Sub-temple of the 3rd respondent devasthanam vide proceedings dated 31.12.1986. He was thereafter 4 promoted as “Archaka” in the main temple vide proceedings dated 09.01.1997. Further promoted as “Mukhya Archaka” and “Upa Pradhana Archaka” vide proceedings dated 10.09.2001 & 17.08.2018 respectively. It is contended that it has been 35 years since the petitioner has been discharging services in the main temple (Sri Varaha Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy vari Devasthanam). However, the 3rd respondent vide proceedings dated 23.02.2022, posted the petitioner as an “In-charge Pradhana Archaka”. Thus he was discharging his duties as In-charge Pradhana Archaka, whereas, the 4th & 5th respondents had been promoted as Pradhana Archakas on 18-09-2022, whereas the petitioner was only promoted as Incharge Pradhana Archaka. 5. It is contended that to the Provisional Seniority List, the petitioner has raised his objections, wherein the 4th & 5th respondents were shown at S.Nos.1& 2. The dates of their promotions were shown as 18.12.2012 and 09.03.2012, respectively and one Sri Gopala Krishnamacharyulu was shown at S.No.3, who has retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.07.2021, and thus the 4th and 5th respondents herein were shown as senior to the petitioner in the cadre of Upa Pradhana Archaka. After the filing of the Writ Petition, the 5th respondent had died. 6. The grievance of the petitioner is that although the petitioner has raised an objection to the promotion of the 4th & 5th respondents as Upa Pradhana Archaka, on the ground that the 4th respondent went abroad for employment and was not in service from 2001 to 2009 in the 3rd respondent 5 temple, which is evident from the Service Register, thus he is not entitled to be promoted as Upa Pradhana Archaka, the said objection raised by the petitioner was not considered. Without considering the objection, the 4th & 5th respondents were promoted as Upa Pradhana Archaka. 7. The 3rd respondent filed counter affidavit stating that the proceedings of 23-02-2022 were issued placing the petitioner as Incharge Pradhana Archaka and he was not promoted as Pradhana Archaka. It is further contended that the provisional seniority list was issued calling for objections. After receiving the objections and after considering the same, final seniority list for promotion to the post of Pradhana Archaka was issued. The petitioner did not raise any objection with regard to placement of the respondents 4 and 5 above the petitioner. In the final seniority list since the 4th and 5th respondents are senior most Upa Pradhana Archakas, their names were considered for promotion to the post of Pradhanaarchaka. 8. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the 4th respondent even after his appointment went abroad on several occasions and availed leave for the same and that there are also criminal cases pending against the 4th respondent. He relies on the circular instructions issued by the Andhra Pradesh Dharmika Parishad, in Circular No.21 in Rc.No.DP1/52200/2009, dated 10.11.2010, wherein it is stated that an Archaka of a temple, who is appointed is not permitted to go abroad. If permitted, such a person is not allowed to perform Archakatvam in the Garbhalayam of the main temple. 6 9. Considered the rival submissions. 10. As seen from the proceedings dated 12.09.2022 issued by the Executive Officer, the objections of the petitioner was not considered. The specific objection of the petitioner regarding the appointment of the unofficial respondents 4 and 5 was not considered, as observed below: “According your above reference Memo No. Rc. No. B2/3292/2011, Dt. 18/06/2022 Sarvasree G. Srinivasacharyulu is showing as Senior list in Sr. No.1 position even though he was worked as Archaka in America during the period from 2001 to 2009 on several occasions on leave and the same was noted in Re. No. B1/4140/2002-1, Dt. 01/11/2010 and his service record as well as his passport etc., Hence he shall not suitable for the post of "Pradhana rchaka" due to voyage (samudrayanam / videsiyanam) under circular No: 21 Rc. No. D.P-1-52200/ 2009 Dt. 10/11/2010.” 11. The specific grievance of the petitioner is that the unofficial respondent No. 4, who went abroad, is not eligible to perform archakatvam at sanctum sanctorum in the light of the Circular memo Circular No.21 in Rc.No.DP1/52200/2009, dated 10.11.2010, however, he was considered senior to the petitioner and issued proceedings, posting him as Pradhana Archaka, which according to the petitioner is in disregard of the circular memo of the endowment department. The 3rd respondent did not reply to the petitioner's specific objection thereto, stating that it is an administrative issue. 12. In view of the above, the matter is remanded to the 3rd respondent temple, for passing of orders afresh in terms of the Circular No.21 in Rc.No.DP1/52200/2009, dated 10.11.2010, after giving opportunity to both the 7 petitioner and unofficial respondents, within one (1) month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 13. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date:18.09.2025 MVK 8 518 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO:41481 of 2022 Date:18.09.2025 MVK