THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO W.A.No.716 OF 2011 J U D G M E N T: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) Aggrieved by the order dated 28-07-2011 passed in W.P.No.31957 of 2010, whereby the learned Single Judge, upheld the order of repatriation directing the writ petitioner to go to the parent institution, the present Appeal has been preferred. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The writ petitioner was initially appointed as a Junior Assistant at Sri Ksheera Ramalingeswara Swamy Temple, Palakol Village and Mandal, West Godavari District and after working in various temples, he was transferred to Vadali Group of Temples, Vadali Village, Penugonda Mandal, West Godavari District, on 18-06- 2010 and he has been working there as a Manager. While so, the 1st respondent issued the memo dated 19-11-2010 withdrawing the service of the petitioner as Manager, Vadali Group of Temples, and repatriating him to his parent institution, i.e., Sri Ksheera Ramalingeswara Swamy Temple, Palakol, based on the report dated 16-12-2009 submitted by the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments - 3rd respondent. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that if the appellant is repatriated to his parent institution, his promotional avenues will be adversely affected. Learned Government Pleader for Endowments submits that there were serious allegations against the appellant and therefore, he was considered not fit to discharge the duties as a Manager. He further submits that if the appellant is aggrieved of the order passed by the 1st respondent, his remedy lies elsewhere. We have considered the submissions made on either side. Admittedly, the appellant was repatriated to his parent institution on administrative exigencies. This Court is normally slow in interfering with the administrative affairs of any department. If the petitioner is aggrieved of the order passed by the 1st respondent, he is not a remediless. He can very well approach his higher ups and seek redressal of his grievance. The learned Single Judge in the order under appeal, has recorded that whenever the employee is repatriated to the parent institution, after completion or before the term of deputation to some other temple, he has no right for retention in the present position and he is bound to go to the parent institution and join in the substantive position. We do not find any illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the learned Single Judge, warranting interference. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed, but however, in the circumstances, without costs. --------------------------- Ghulam Mohammed, J --------------------------------- Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J 22nd November 2011 Mrk