APHC010716252018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] MONDAY, THE 20th DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 34552/2018 Between: 1. PUTLA GEORGE FRANKLIN, S/O.PREMAIAH, AGE 62 YEARS, OCC. EMPLOYEE, R/O.D.NO.18-4-12, OLD PONNUR, PONNUR PO AND MD, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF A P, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT. GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, NAZ CENTER, GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SRI BHAVANARAYANA SWAMY TEMPLE, PONNUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH ...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 to to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not applying the Circular No.W/440/2015, dt.31.03.2015 of the Commissioner, 2 VS,J W.P.No.34552 of 2018 Endowments Department, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad in paying the retirement gratuity to the petitioner but applying the same to others who are similarly situated as illegal, arbitrary, and violation of principles of natural justice, Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequentially direct the respondents to pay the retirement gratuity to the petitioner by applying the Circular No.W/440/2015, dt.31.03.2015 of the Commissioner, Endowments Department, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 respondents to pay the retirement gratuity to the Petitioner on par with similarly situated persons by applying the Circular No.W/440/2015, dt. 31.03.2015 of Commissioner, Endowments Department, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. J U M V PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. KAPPERA KOTESWARA RAO SC for Endowments,AP Region. 2. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP) 3. ELEVATED AS JUDGE The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.No.34552 of 2018 ORDER: This Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following prayer: “…to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not applying the Circular No.W/440/2015, dt.31.03.2015 of the Commissioner, Endowments Department, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad in paying the retirement gratuity to the petitioner but applying the same to others who are similarly situated as illegal, arbitrary, and violation of principles of natural justice, Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequentially direct the respondents to pay the retirement gratuity to the petitioner by applying the Circular No.W/440/2015, dt.31.03.2015 of the Commissioner, Endowments Department, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and to pass…” 2. The petitioner herein was initially appointed as attender in the 4th respondent temple on the time scale of pay with effect from 23.04.1987. On attaining the age of superannuation, the petitioner got retired from service on 31.07.2017. 3. The case of the petitioner is that he has completed 30 years of service and as such, he is entitled to take full retirement gratuity as per rules in force. As per provision under Section 35 of the Endowments Act, 30/1987 read with G.O.Ms.No.888, Revenue (Endts-I) department, dated 08.12.2000, an employee of a religious or charitable institution or endowment is entitled for compassionate gratuity and that the 4 VS,J W.P.No.34552 of 2018 Commissioner may for his reasons sanction the same. While the things stood thus, A.P. Dharmila Parishad, Hyderabad vide circular bearing No.20 in Rc.No.DP1/52200/2009, dated 10.11.2010 issued instructions as per which, any employee who is either on consolidated wages or drawing scale of pay and belongs to a temple whose annual income is Rs.50,00,000/- per year and more would be entitled for a gratuity scheme as under: Temple employee should have put in a minimum of 10 years of Service. For every year of service rendered Rs.10,000/- would accrue towards Gratuity. If a temple employee has put in service of 10 years, he becomes entitled for a Gratuity of Rs.1.00 lakh; for 15 years of service he becomes eligible for 1.50 lakh; for 20 years of service and beyond Gratuity will remains at Rs.2.00 Lakhs only. The maximum Gratuity that a temple employee is entitled would be Rs.2.00 Lakhs only. No Gratuity is proposed to be paid to a person who works less than 10 years and leaves/removed from the organization for any reason. However, if a temple employee who is already on the rolls of temple and dies while in service, his family will be entitled to gratuity equivalent to the number of years of service put in by him. This scheme is applicable to all temple staff working either on scale pay or consolidated basis for 10 years or more except persons who are covered by Pension Scheme. 5 VS,J W.P.No.34552 of 2018 All temple employees who are not covered by the Gratuity Scheme introduced by Archaka Welfare Trust will be covered under the present scheme irrespective of the size of temple. 4. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent issued circular No.W/440/2015, dated 31.03.2015 as per which, the gratuity payable to the employees who have put 20 years of service in religious institutions having income of less than Rs.50,00,000/- was extended to Rs.4,00,000/-; Rs.3,00,000/- and Rs.2,00,000/- to those who worked for 15 years and 10 years respectively. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent authorities have paid retirement gratuity to him as per circular dated 10.11.2010 instead of the amended circular dated 31.03.2015 as per which, he is entitled for gratuity of Rs.4,00,000/-. Hence, the present writ petition is filed. 5. The 4th respondent filed a counter affidavit admitting the facts as stated by the petitioner and further, it is stated that the circular dated 31.03.2015, issued by the 2nd respondent is only to the employees who are working in religious institutions having annual income below Rs.50,00,000/-. The annual income of the 4th respondent institution as on the date of retirement of the petitioner i.e., 2016-17 is Rs.75,56,891/-. As such, the circular dated 31.03.2015 is not applicable to the case of the petitioner and as such, the petitioner is not entitled for retirement gratuity of Rs.4,00,000/- as claimed by him. 6 VS,J W.P.No.34552 of 2018 6. Heard Sri. J.U.M.V. Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments. 7. Perused the entire material available on record. Admittedly, the petitioner was appointed as Attender in the 4th respondent temple on 23.04.1987 and upon attaining the age of superannuation, he got retired on 31.07.2017. As per the circular dated 10.11.2010, issued by the A.P. Dharmila Parishad, an employee who completed 20 years of service is entitled for payment of Rs.2,00,000/- towards gratuity. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent issued a circular dated 31.03.2015 enhancing the gratuity to be paid to employees who served for more than 20 years in a religious institution having annual income below Rs.50,00,000/-. 8. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he has worked for more than 20 years in the 4th respondent temple, he was paid Rs.2,00,000/- towards gratuity at the time of his retirement. However, it can be seen from the counter affidavit that the annual income of the 4th respondent temple during 2016-17 is beyond Rs.50,00,000/-. As such, it is evident that the circular issued by the 2nd respondent is not applicable to the petitioner who worked in the 4th respondent temple having annual income of more than Rs.50,00,000/- i.e., Rs.75,56,891/- for the year 2016- 17. Hence, the contention of the petitioner that the respondents have not paid him retirement gratuity basing on the circular dated 31.03.2015 is untenable, as the same is not applicable to the petitioner. 7 VS,J W.P.No.34552 of 2018 9. In view of the foregoing discussion, this writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Petition shall stand closed. _____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA 20.07.2026 Gss