THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.23248 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner is employed as a Clerk in Kunti Madhava Swamy Temple, Pithapuram. Vide orders, dated 29.05.2007, the Commissioner of Endowments, Hyderabad, the 1st respondent herein, sent him on deputation to Sri Bachu Ramesam Choultry, to work as Person-in- Management. Through order, dated 21.10.2009, the 1st respondent repatriated the petitioner to his parent institution. The same is challenged in this Writ Petition. The petitioner contends that though the order appears to be innocuous, making of reference to certain proceedings, gives an indication that it is issued as a punitive step. The respondents filed counter-affidavit. It is stated that several complaints were received as to the functioning of the petitioner at the Choultry, and as such, it was felt necessary to repatriate him. It is stated that, if it becomes necessary to take any action against the petitioner, prescribed procedure will be followed. Heard Sri J.Prabhakar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Endowments and Sri V.T.M. Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for Endowments. No employee can claim the deputation into another organization, as a matter of right. The petitioner was sent on deputation to a Choultry. Obviously because the respondents felt that the presence of the petitioner in the Choultry is not in their interest, they have repatriated him to the parent organization. The respondents could have repatriated the petitioner, without assigning any reason whatever and in the absence of any allegations as to his functioning. In the instant case, the record discloses that there were allegations and that prompted them to repatriate the petitioner. He cannot be said to have suffered any detriment, on account of mere repatriation. Though the respondents have stated that such allegations are true against the petitioner, they cannot take them into account, much less can they pass any orders detrimental his interests, without conducting enquiry and without giving opportunity to him. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of, in the circumstances, upholding the impugned order, but directing that the respondents shall not take any steps adverse to the interests of the petitioner, without giving opportunity to him in accordance with law. There shall be no order as costs. _____________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.15.07.2010. GJ