HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No. 26560 2000 Between: V.Devaraj S/o. Munirathnam. ..... PETITIONER and The Executive Officer, Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. .....RESPONDENTS HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No. 26560 OF 2000 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent-TTD in not transferring the membership of V. Pattabhi, badge No.3 at Kalyanakatta in Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam (TTD), to the petitioner on attaining majority as per the order of the TTD in Roc.No.R6/638/RO.II/TML/80, dated 18.07.1980, as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently, direct the respondent to transfer the membership of V. Pattabhi in favour of the petitioner herein. The case of the petitioner is that his grandfather viz. V. Pattabhi worked as barber at Kalyanakatta (pradamam) and held badge No.3 for the services rendered by him and that the badge held by his grandfather was heritable and transferable. The petitioner states that when his grandfather fell sick, he requested for transfer of badge No.3 in favour of one G.Krishnaiah and that the TTD accepted the same and passed orders on 18.07.1980 transferring badge No.3 in favour of the said G. Krishnaiah temporarily on condition that the same is retransferable to the grandson of V. Pattabhi, the petitioner herein, on attaining majority. The petitioner, on attaining the age of majority in the year 1998, filed a petition seeking to retransfer badge No.3 held by G. Krishnaiah in his name to render his services as barber at Kalyanakatta (pradamam). The grievance of the petitioner is that though he filed a petition before the TTD in the year 1998, the same was not considered on the ground that Section 34 of the A.P. Charitable Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short ‘the Act’) does not permit inheritance of any post held earlier by any employee. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in so far as Section 34 of the Act is concerned, it is not applicable for the services rendered by a barber and, in fact, when a similar question arose before this Court in W.P.No. 19053 of 1997, this Court, by order dated 13.03.2003, held that the custom of pilgrims offering their hair when they go for blessings of the presiding deity is not prevalent in all temples and there could not have been a post of barber either in the general rules or special rules of the TTD. It further held that the mere fact that some of the barbers are regularized and are equated with Class IV servants of the temple does not mean that a barber is holding an office or rendering any service and, therefore, reliance placed on Section 34 of the Act is wholly misconceived. Relying on the aforesaid order, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no rule is available for barbers in the service rules of the TTD or the Act and, therefore, the order passed on 18.07.1980 needs to be given effect to. I am in full agreement with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the petitioner is entitled to hold badge No.3 of V. Pattabhi (grandfather of the petitioner). It is stated that the said G.Krishnaiah, in whose favour badge No.3 was transferred under the orders of the TTD when V.Pattabhi fell sick in the year 1980, filed a suit for injunction not to retransfer badge No.3. The said suit was dismissed and appeal filed thereagainst also ended in dismissal. Viewed from any angle, the petitioner is entitled for retransfer of badge No.3 held by V. Pattabhi, his grandfather, for rendering services as a barber at Kalyanakatta (pradamam) in the TTD. Therefore, the respondent-TTD is directed to implement the orders passed on 18.07.1980 forthwith. The writ petition is allowed. No costs. C.V. RAMULU, J Dt:22.01.2010 USD