Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Between vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh And ... on 29 October, 2024
1
APHC010411352014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3310]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF OCTOBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 22467/2014
Between:
Sri Durga Malleswara Swamy Varla Devasthanam ...PETITIONER
AND
The Government Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. V V N NARASIMHAM
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. PADMAVATHI PADNAVIS
2. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP)
The Court made the following:
ORDER
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:
".....to issue a Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in adding additional barbers to the existing barbers indiscriminately without reference to requirement and demand depriving the livelihood of hundred existing regular barbers who are members of petitioner association and in not extending benefit by paying remuneration as per Circular No A1/4824/2013 dated 05.02.2013 as bad, illegal, arbitrary and offends Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequentially to direct the respondents not to add more barbers to the existing hundred barbers at Kesakandanasala of 3rd respondent temple and to pay remuneration as per the Circular No A1/4824/2013 dated 05.02.2013 instead of paying remuneration as per the 2 Circular No A1/4824/2013 dated 05.02.2013 instead of paying remuneration of ticket basis treating them as skilled workers and to pass...."
2. The case of the petitioner is that the 3rd respondent Devasthanam is an ancient Hindu Religious institution situated at Indrakeeladri, Vijayawada. During the year lacks of pilgrims from various parts of State as well as Country used to visit and offer their worship. It is an old age practice to offer tonsure (Thalaneelalu). The regular barbers used to attend tonsure work throughout the year on shift basis. During festival occasions, there is huge congregation, particularly for Dasara Festival, during which period, the services of barbers from various places will be engaged about numbering 1000 in a day, besides the members of association numbering about hundred. Initially the hereditary family used to engage on their own to discharge the responsibility of tonsuring service. Later, the 3rd respondent administration has directly taken responsibility of engaging barbers in view of increase of pilgrims and demand. During the year 2002, it is increased to 39, later it is increased to 59 during the year 2004. The number of barbers during the year 2011 is only 62. But for the last three years, there is abnormal increase and indiscriminate engagement of barbers by successive officers of 3rd respondent without reference to requirement, demand and assessment, which led to abnormal increase up to 100 barbers at present existing at 3rd respondent Devasthanam. In such process, there is a representation made on 21-7-2014, representing several difficulties facing by the members including engaging additional barbers and there is a general body meeting held on 26-7-2014 at Kesakandanasala, authorizing the President to seek appropriate remedy before this Hon'ble 3 Court. Thus at present the petitioners are getting Rs.5/- per ticket, thereby they are able to get monthly remuneration, on average from Rs.2000/- to Rs.3000/-.
It is further stated that the 2nd respondent was pleased to issue circular No.A1/4824/ 2013, dated 05-02-2013, where under it is directed all the major temples to fix up remuneration to NMRs/Contract/Consolidated/ Daily Wage Workers. But, in Rc.No.A3/6809/04, dated 03-08-2004, the 3rd respondent was pleased to recommend the cases of 59 existing barbers, discharging tonsuring work in its establishment, for regularization of their services, duly granting scales. In pursuance of the same, the 2nd respondent was pleased to accord permission in Rc.No.A1/39985/04-2, dated 02-04-2005, to pay consolidate pay of Rs.2000/- per month. The consolidate pay in fact was approved by the Trust Board in its Resolution No.42, dated 30-4-2005. It is also relevant to mention that 27 barbers who were working during festive occasions, approached this Hon'ble Court by way of filing W.P.No.27428/2008, complaining that adding of outsiders as additional barbers in addition to existing barbers and ignoring their cases as bad. The 3 rd respondent has filed counter affidavit stating that if it is required to engage huge number only during festive occasions, but not regularly. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 08-07-2010 taking into account the averments made in the counter without granting relief as prayed for. In this case, in spite of several representations made explaining all the 4 problems, the 3rd respondent has not taken any action so far. Hence, the present writ petition.
3. Heard Ms. Hima Bindu, learned counsel representing Sri V.V.N.Narasimham, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Rashid, learned Assistant Government Pleader for official respondents and Ms. Padmavati Padnavis, learned Standing counsel for the un-official respondents.
4. On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the averments made in the petition and prayed to pass appropriate orders.
5. Whereas, learned Assistant Government Pleader has furnished a copy of G.O.Ms.No.110 Revenue (Endowments. I) Department, dated 13.03.2023, and submits that, during pendency of this writ petition, the Government has issued the said G.O.Ms.No.110, stating that, after careful examination of the matter, hereby approved the scheme of Minimum Assured Commission @ Rs.20,000/- per month of Nayee Brahims working for tonsuring activity in temples under the control of Endowments Department and permitted the Commissioner of Endowments to implement the scheme.
6. So, in view of the above, the respondents No.2 and 3 are directed to consider the case of the petitioner in terms of the above G.O.Ms.No.110, dated 13.03.2023, and pass appropriate orders, as expeditiously, as possible.
7. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
5
8. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
______________________________ DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J.
Date :-29-10-2024 Gvl 6 HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION No.22467 of 2014 Date :29.10.2024 Gvl 7