Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
M Nagesham vs State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 30 March, 2022
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITION No.2762 of 2022
ORDER:
The present writ petition is filed by the petitioners challenging the action of the 4th respondent-Temple in proposing to induct outside barbers for tonsuring services during Jatara to be held during Maga Masam i.e., from 02.02.2022 to 02.03.2022, which is in violative of principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 21 and 25 of Constitution of India.
2. It is the case of the petitioners that the four families of the petitioners are performing the tonsuring services at 4th respondent- Temple from the time immemorial as such, they are recognized as hereditary barber service holders of the temple. In earlier occasion, they filed W.P.No.9083 of 2009 seeking regularization of their services for fixing the regular time scale but the same is pending for consideration on the file of this Court. In the year 2006, the 4th respondent-Temple trust board passed resolution dated 05.01.2006 fixing Rs.1,000/- per month for each service holder towards remuneration but paid an amount of Rs.71,808/- in the year 2009 and Rs.79,168/- in the year 2011 and thereafter, the same was not implemented.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that except the four families of the petitioners, there are no other families, which were recognised as hereditary barber service holders of 4th respondent-Temple and they should be considered as outsiders only and sometimes at the behest of Executive Officer of the 4th respondent-Temple, their services have been engaging according to their wish and will. But there is no statutory recognition in their favour and they are not entitled for such services as a right. He 2 further contended that the trust board of the 4th respondent- Temple many times passed resolutions for enhancing the charges for tonsuring services from time to time in favour of the petitioners i.e., in the year 2002, 2006, 2011 etc. Recently on 18.02.2022, the 2nd respondent also issued proceedings directing the 4th respondent herein to consider the request of the petitioners herein for enhancement of remuneration at Rs.25/- by way of ticket collection for each tonsure in the temple. As such, the petitioners are possessed the hereditary rights of barber service at 4th respondent-Temple and they cannot be deprived of their livelihood by allowing other than their family members to render services for tonsuring at 4th respondent-Temple by the respondent authorities is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional.
4. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.5 to 9 contended that respondent Nos.5 to 9, who are the members of Sri Ashwardhanarayana Swamy Nayee Brahmin Cooperative Society (for short, „the Society‟), have been rendering tonsuring services at 4th respondent-Temple since 50 years and eking out their livelihood purely upon the services of the tonsuring. This Court in W.P.No.19662 of 2009 accepted the rights of the members of the Society and directed the 1st respondent therein to consider the case of the petitioner-Society therein and pass appropriate orders. In view of the orders of this Court also, their services have been continuing, more particularly, at the time of Maga Masam Jatara.
5. Learned Standing Counsel for the 4th respondent-Temple filed counter affidavit as well as petition seeking to vacate the interim order passed by this Court dated 18.02.2022, wherein the Executive Officer of the 4th respondent-Temple categorically stated 3 that the 4th respondent is notified as temple under Section 6(a) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) and no hereditary barbers are working in the 4th respondent- Temple and no names were entered in the Registers maintained under Sections 25, 38 and 43 of the Act. He further stated that the hereditary rights in respect of Mirasidars, Archakas, other office holders and servants were abolished under Section 34 of the Act, whereas the writ petitioners are residents of Peddapappuru Village but the 4th respondent-Temple is situated at Chinnapappuru Village. He also stated that since the day of holding post as Executive Officer of the 4th respondent-Temple on 24.11.2021, the services of tonsuring at Kalyana Katta is being rendered by two groups. One group is representing the writ petitioners herein and another group is members representing the Society and both parties are working at Kalyana Katta peacefully without any disturbance since 2021. The 4th respondent also placed material along with his counter one of that is the order of this Court in W.P.No.159 of 2010, which was filed by respondent Nos.5 to 9, who are members of the Society, seeking to declare the action of the respondent authorities in not allowing them for performing the tonsuring work in 4th respondent-Temple, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India. After hearing the matter, this Court held as under:
"4. In these circumstances, I consider it appropriate to direct respondent No.2 to consider the representation of the petitioner association and, in case services of additional barbers are required, consider the members of the petitioners 4 association along with other eligible barbers for rendering tonsure services in respondent No.3 temples."
6. Pursuant to the orders of this Court, the Deputy Commissioner issued proceedings dated 14.02.2011 allowing respondent Nos.5 to 9, who are members of the Society, to render tonsuring work in view of the heavy congregation of the devotees during Maga Masam festival and hence, the Manager of the 4th respondent-Temple is hereby permitted to utilise the services of respondent Nos.5 to 9 for tonsuring work along with temple barbers and pay remuneration to the additional barbers as per the circular of the Endowments Department dated 11.10.2007.
7. In view of the circumstances stated above and material placed before this Court and also the orders of this Court, the claim of the writ petitioners that they are hereditary barber service holders and their services were recognised as temple barbers is sustainable and conclusive in nature. There is a substance in the contention of the petitioners that they are hereditary barber service holders and they have been continuously rendering tonsuring services at 4th respondent-Temple. Similarly, the respondent authorities have been engaging the services of respondents Nos.5 to 9 as barbers for rendering tonsuring services at the time of Maga Masam Jatara and when there is a huge congregation of devotees are in thousands, the services of the regular barbers are not at all sufficient to meet the said congregation. The material placed before this Court shows that the services of respondent Nos.5 to 9, who are members of the Society, have been engaging continuously since long time as such, they cannot be deprived of from their livelihood.
5
8. Therefore, the Writ Petition is partly allowed recognising the petitioners as temple barbers/hereditary barber service holders but at the same time respondent Nos.5 to 9 are also rendering their services continuously at 4th respondent-Temple at the time of Maga Masam Jatara due to heavy congregation. Hence, the services of respondent Nos.5 to 9, who are members of the Society, shall be continued. There shall be no order as to costs.
Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
______________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J Date: 30.03.2022 Ivd 6 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION No.2762 of 2022 Dated: 30.03.2022 Ivd