( 1 ) THIS writ petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus declaring the order of the first respondent dated 6-7-1996 as illegal and in violation of the Andhra Pradesh charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Office-holders and Servants Conditions of Service Rules, 1983. The petitioner was appointed as a Sweeper in Sri Durga Malleswara Swamy Varla Devasthanam, vijayawada. He was promoted as Watchnum and was further promoted as record Assistant. On the relevant day he was holding the post of Junior assistant having been promoted as such in November, 1996. On 6-7-1996 the commissioner of Endowments Department transferred the petitioner from Sri durga Malleswara Swami Varla Devasthanam to Sri Swamy Hathiramji Mutt. While transferring the petitioner to the said Mutt, the third respondent who was working as a Junior Assistant in Sri Swamy Hathiramji Mutt was transferred and posted at Sri Durga Malleswara Swami Varla Devasthanam and joined in place of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the orders of the transfer the present Writ petition is filed.

( 2 ) THE main argument of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the commissioner shall have power to transfer any office-holder or servant attached to a charitable or religious institution or endowment from that institution, or endowment to any other institution, or endowment in accordance with such rules framed by the Government, in exercise of the power conferred under Section 31 of the Hindu Religious Institutions and endowments Act, 1966. The Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious institutions and Endowments Office-holders and Servants Conditions of service Rules, 1983 were framed under Section 31 of the Act and under Rule 39, special provision was made for eight institutions viz. , (1) Sri Varahalakshminarasimha Swamy Devasthanam, Simhachalam. (2) Sri Veera Venkata Satyanarayana Swamy Devasthanam, Annavaram. (3) Sri Durga Malleswara Swamy Devasthanam, Vijayawada. (4) Sri Bhramaramba Mallikarjuna Swamy Devasthanam, Srisailam. (5) Sri Venkateswara Swamy Devasthanam, Dwaraka Tirumala. (6) Sri Seetharamachandra Swamy Devasthanam, Bhadrachalam. (7) Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Devasthanam, Yadagirigutta. (8) Sri Rajarajeswara Swamy Devasthanam, Vemulavada. Rule 43 provides that all the eight institutions shall constitute one unit for purposes of recruitment, transfer, promotion, seniority and discharge for want of vacancies, etc. , and separate orders will issue in this regard. Therefore, the learned Counsel submitted that for the purpose of transfer, promotion, seniority and discharge for want of vacancies, these eight institutions constitute one unit, and the transfer of employees in these eight institutions should be from one institution to another institution. Since Rule 43 confines the transfer of the petitioner from Durga Malleswara Swamy Varla Devasthanam, vijayawada to Sri Swamy Hathiramji Mutt is contrary to the rules and, therefore, it should be set aside.

( 3 ) THE Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner has been transferred from Sri Swamy Hathiramji Mutt to Sri Durga Malleswara swami Varla Devasthanam, Vijayawada on compassionate grounds and on request if he has been transferred back to Sri Swamy Hathiramji Mutt he will suffer irreparable loss. He also submitted that the Commissioner is competent to transfer from the Temple to the Mutt in exercise of the power under section 31 of the Act. Therefore, there is no infirmity in the order of the transfer.

( 4 ) IN P. Seshachalam vs. Executive Officer it has been held that the rules framed under the earlier Act will continue to be in force even after the promulgation of the new Act, unless they are inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions of the new Act. This is the correct legal position. Therefore, the Rules framed under the old Act will continue to be valid and in force even after the commencement of the new Act. i. e. , Act of 1987.

( 5 ) SECTION 31 confers power on the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document