SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 19686

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
HARINATH.N
J. Ravi Kumar – Appellant
Versus
The Government of A.P – Respondent
WP 31655/2013



APHC010328902013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3457]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

FRIDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 31655/2013 Between:

1. J . RAVI KUMAR,, S/O. AZARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC:

PRESENTLY WORKING AS JR. ASSISTANT, SRI TRIKOTESWARA SWAMY VARI DEVASTHANAM, KOYSPPSKONDA, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER AND

1. T HE GOVERNMENT OF A P, REP. BY ITS THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, ANDHRA PRADESH, BOGGULAKUNTA, TILAK ROAD, HYDERABAD.

2. T HE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT GUNTUR, -

3. S RI LAKSHMI NARASIMHASWAMY VARI DEVASTHANAM, MANGALAGIRI,GUNTUR DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER.

4. S RI RAJYA LAKSHMI SAMETHA LAKSHMINARASIMHA SWAMY VARI, DEVASTHANAM, R. AGRAHARAM, GUNTUR, REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER.

...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 toto issue an appropriate Writ order or direction more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus a) Declaring the proceedings in RC No. NIL/2013 dt. 25.09.2013 The Executive Officer of the 4th Respondent i.e. Sri Rajya Lakshmi Sametha Lakshminarasimha Swamy Vari Devasthanam, R. Agraharam, Guntur temple as bad, illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction, contrary to Law and b) Consequently declare that the petitioner is employee of 3rd Rspondent institution and is entitled to be continued as Jr. Assisatnt in pursuance of the proceedings of 3rd Respondent i.e. Executive Officer, Sri Lakshmi Narasimhaswamy Vari Devasthanam, Mangalagiri, Guntur District, in RC No. B1/ 106/2007 dt. 15.03.2008 from said date of his promotion as Jr. Assistant with all consequential benefits at the 3rd Respondent institution and to pass.

IA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 39339 OF 2013 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 suspend the proceedings RC No. NIL/2013 dt. 25.09.2013 of the 4th Respondent i.e., Executive Officer, Sri Rajya Lakshmi Sametha Lakshminarasimha Swamy Vari Devasthanam, R.Agraharam, Guntur and consequential direct respotkietr to continue me as Jr.Assistant as per the proceedings in RC No. B1/106/2007 dt. 15.03.2008 of the 3rd Respodnent temple i.e. Sri Lakshmi Narasimhaswamy Vari Devasthanam, Mangalagiri, Guntur District pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass.

Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. JESHTADI SUNIL KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. KAPPERA KOTESWARA RAO SC for Endowments,AP Region.

2. V T M PRASAD

3. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following:

Date of reserve : 17.04.2026 Date of pronouncement : 08.05.2026 Date of Upload : 08.05.2026 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.31655 of 2013

ORDER:

1. The petitioner is challenging proceedings dated 25.09.2013 issued by the Executive Officer of the 4th respondent and seeks a consequential direction to declare that the petitioner is an employee of the 3rd respondent institution and to treat him as Junior Assistant in pursuance of the proceedings dated 15.03.2008, and also seeks all consequential benefits at the 3rd respondent institution.

2. Sri W.B.Srinivas, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was initially appointed as an Attender in Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Devasthanam, R.Agraharam, Guntur Town vide proceedings dated 28.01.1988.

3. It is submitted that one Sri. S.Anjaneyacharyulu, Attender – Cum –

Record Assistant working in the 3rd respondent, sought a transfer to the 4th respondent. The petitioner also requested that the 3rd respondent institution do so on mutual terms. The mutual transfer request of the petitioner and S.Anjaneyacharyulu was accepted, and proceedings dated 25.02.1988 were issued.

4. It is submitted that the petitioner was promoted as Record Assista

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top