THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27737 of 2011 ORDER: The petitioner was appointed as a Clerk in Sri Anjaneyaswami Temple, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam in the year 1991. Through proceedings, dated 13.04.1993 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Endowments Department, Kakinada, he was transferred to Sri Durgalamma Ammavari Temple, Visakhapatnam. From there, the petitioner was transferred to Karakachettu Polamamba Ammavari Temple, 3rd respondent herein, vide proceedings, dated 25.04.2006. Through proceedings, dated 27.09.2011, the 1st respondent repatriated the petitioner to the institution, where he was initially appointed i.e., Sri Anjaneyaswami Temple, Gajuwaka. The petitioner challenges the said proceedings on several grounds. He contends that he earned promotion to the post of Senior Assistant while working in the 3rd respondent-Temple and that as of now, there is no post of Senior Assistant in Sri Anjaneyaswami Temple, Gajuwada. He further submits that with the framing of Rules in G.O.Ms.No.888, dated 08.12.2000, the Temple has been treated as a unit for appointment and since the petitioner was working in Sri Durgalamma Ammavari Temple, that Temple needs to be treated as his parent institution. He further submits that his transfer to Sri Anjanayaswami Temple would result in violation of the norms stipulated under proviso to Section 57(2)(a)(i) of the Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was initially appointed in Sri Anjaneyaswami Temple, Gajuwaka. From there, he was transferred to Sri Durgalamma Ammavari Temple, Visakhapatnam in the year 1993 and to the 3rd respondent-Temple, in the year 2006. In the recent past, the 1st respondent has taken a decision to ensure that the employees working in various Temples are repatriated to their parent institutions. It is in this process that the impugned order came to be passed. Added to that, there were complaints from the employees of various institutions vis-à-vis the persons, who are working on deputation or on transfer from other institutions. The contention of the petitioner that he is a regular employee either of the 3rd respondent-Temple or Sri Durgalamama Ammavari Temple cannot be accepted, inasmuch as the respective orders, through which he was transferred from these institutions clearly mentioned that his posting was purely by way of transfer. The petitioner cannot be treated as the employee either of the 3rd respondent-Temple or Sri Durgalammavari Temple, since he was not initially appointed in those institutions. He has naturally to go back to the parent institution i.e., Sri Anjaneyaswami Temple, Gajuwaka. It may be true that the petitioner earned promotion while working in the 3rd respondent-Temple. However, when he is reverted, he has to take his corresponding position available in the parent institution. He cannot be expected to continue in the same position, which he held in the 3rd respondent- Temple. If the situation warrants, the petitioner may have to work as Junior Assistant and if there are no vacancies, the junior most in the category must be reverted. This Court does not find any basis to interfere with the impugned order. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 11.10.2011 Note: Issue C.C. in two days. (B/o) JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27737 of 2011 Date: 11.10.2011 JSU