COMMON ORDER:

As the issue and as well as the petitioner in these two cases is one and the same, these writ petitions are decided by way of a common order.

(a). W.P. NO. 435 of 2015:

The present writ petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the 3rdrespondent in issuing the impugned proceedings in Rc.No.A1/2014/2014 dated 2.1.2015, cancelling the cadre strength approved to the temple in proceedings D.Dis.No.A1/5099/2013, dated 24.12.2013, by reverting the petitioner from the post of Superintendent to the post of Senior Assistant and withdrawing the services of the petitioner from the establishment of Sri CocanadaAnnadanaSamajam, Kakinada to Sri NookalammaAmmavari Temple,Kandrakota Village,Peddapuram Mandal, East Godavari District, is highly irregular,arbitrary, motivated,colourable exercise of the powers, wholly illegal and against law as well as principles of natural justice and consequentially set aside the same…”

(b). W.P. NO. 22436 of 2015:

The present writ petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the 4threspondent in issuing the Pro in Rc.No.Nil/2015, dt.5.3.2015, reverting the petitioner from Senior Assistant to Junior Assistant and Proceedings of Rc.No.A1/2014/2014 dated 02.01.2015, of 3rdrespondent repatriating the petitioner from 5threspondent temple to 4threspondent by withdrawing the lien of petitioner from 5threspondent ignoring entire service to the parent department though the 5threspondent temple is having sufficient means and income and even the expenditure also within the permissible limits of 30% of the income as illegal, arbitrary, unsustainable, against law, highly irregular, arbitrary, motivated,colourable exercise of the powers, wholly illegal and against law as well as principles of natural justice and consequentially set aside the same by directing the respondents to continue the petitioner as Superintendent in the 5threspondent temple and pass…”

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner initially joined as Junior Assistant in the Officer of the Executive Officer, CoconadaAnnadanaSamajam on 11.02.1995 and was later on transferred and posted as Junior Assistant in the officer of the 4th respondent as per the proceedings of the 3rd respondent vide proceedings No.A1/194/2004, dated 25.02.2004 and accordingly reported to duty on 01.03.2014 at the 4th respondent temple.

3. Thereafter, the petitioner was also promoted as Senior Assistant vide proceedings Lr.No.13/2010, dated 27.09.2010 by the 3rd respondent in the same temple. In pursuance of the proceedings in Rc.No.B2/43466/2011, dated 09.01.2012, issued by the 2nd respondent, the 3rd respondent vide proceedings No.A1/5099/2013, dated 24.12.2013, approved the revised cadre of Sri NookalammaAmmavari Temple. Subsequently, the 3rd respondent has directed the 4th respondent to take necessary action on the representation of the petitioner for promotion to the cadre of Superintendent. Thereafter, as per the directions and approval of the 3rd respondent, the petitioner was promoted as Superintendent in the 4th respondent temple vide proceedings dated 24.12.2013 and the petitioner has been discharging his duties as Superintendent in the 4th respondent temple.

4. While the matter being so, the 3rd respondent, on making a surprise visit to the 4th respondent temple on 24.12.2014, found that there is no work load in the temple and came to a conclusion that there is no necessity to continue the post of Superintendent in the said temple and had withdrawn the post of Superintendent vide impugned proceedings in Rc.No.A1/214/2014, dated 02.01.2015, by cancelling the earlier proceedings vide Dis.No.A1/3636/2013, dated 23.12.2013 and further directed the 4th respondent for approval of the revised cadre strength. Thereafter, the 3rd res