IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD Thursday, August 04, 2011. Present: The Hon’ble Sri Justice N. Ravi Shankar W.P.No. 19058 of 2002 Between: P.A.L.S.S. Kumari ..Petitioner and Sri Veera Venkata Satyanarayana Swami Devasthanam Annavaram. …Respondent The Hon’ble Sri Justice N. Ravi Shankar W.P.No. 19058 of 2002 O r d e r: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. The point raised in this writ petition is whether the order in Rc.No.OHS/16-4/2001-2002 dated:29.3.2002 of the Additional Commissioner and Executive Officer of Sri Veera Venkata Satyanarayana Swami Devasthanam, Annavaram (for short ‘the Respondent)’ reverting the petitioner to the post of Record Assistant from the post of Junior Assistant is valid or not. 3. The impugned order itself shows that earlier the petitioner was working as Junior Assistant. There is another order passed by the respondent on 6-2-2002 which is to the effect that the services of the petitioner and one A.V.S.S. Prasad, who were working as Junior Assistants in Devasthanam i.e., temple were withdrawn and made over to the Oriental High School, Junior and Degree College, so that their services may be utilized there for availing the grant-in- aid provided by the government. It is reported that thereafter the petitioner and the aforesaid A.V.S.S. Prasad were posted to Oriental High School. The grievance of the petitioner is that after one-and- half months latter i.e., on 29.3.2002 she has been reverted as Record Assistant on the ground of “want of vacancy”. 4. The main plea of the petitioner is that there are several juniors to her and that whole Devasthanam has to be treated as one unit as per Rule 33 of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Office Holders and Servants Service Rules, 2000 and if whole Devasthanam is treated as one Unit she cannot be reverted. An elaborate counter has been filed by the respondent answering the contentions of the petitioner, but it is not convincing going by the above Rule. In addition to this the petitioner has also filed a reply affidavit and along with the same she also filed the seniority list of the employees of the Devasthanam. It is seen that though her name is not there, it shows that several others, who are juniors to the petitioner and who were promoted as Junior Assistant subsequently, are continued as junior assistants. This fact is not disputed by the learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent. It may be noted that when several employees are there in a particular category, reversion for want of vacancy has to be made on the principle of “last come first go” and it is seen that the said principle is not followed here. In the circumstances the impugned order has to be set aside. 5. It is however brought to my notice that the petitioner has been subsequently promoted again as Junior Assistant in the year 2005. The learned counsel for the petitioner says that the seniority of the petitioner has to be reckoned ignoring the above reversion order and I think this request of the petitioner stands to reason. 6. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. The order passed by the Additional Commissioner & Executive Officer, Sri Veera Venkata Satyanarayana Swami Devasthanam, Annavaram in Rc.No.OHS/ 16-4/2001-2002 dated:29.3.2002 is set aside. The Devasthanam authorities shall now reckon the seniority of the petitioner ignoring the above reversion order and restore her seniority as per Rules. No costs. ______________________ N. RAVI SHANKAR, J. August 4, 2011. *BVS