THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.16310 OF 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking to issue writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not allowing the petitioner to discharge Asaadi services in Sri Pallalamma Ammavari Temple, Vanapalli Village, Kothapeta Mandal, East Godavari District as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to discharge the services of Asaadi in the said temple. 2. Sri Pallalamma Ammavari Temple, Vanapalli Village, Kothapeta Mandal, East Godavari District is under the control of the 2nd respondent. There are persons called Asaadis for rendering services to the deity. On rotation, three families viz., Vadlamuri Satti Raju, Vadlamuri Somayya and Gollapalli Pothuraju are discharging the services to the deity. The petitioner belongs to Gollapalli Pothuraju family. An amount of Rs.1,200/- per month is being paid by the 2nd respondent for the services. The petitioner has been discharging his duty for more than 15 years without any complaint. The annual festival of the temple will commence in short time. Without initiating any proceeding or notice, the 2nd respondent at the instance of other Asaadis and some of the villagers high-handedly stopped him to attend the services of the deity. His family members are the dependents on the small income and when his turn to serve in festival season has come, he was not allowed to attend the temple and if it is continued, he will be put to irreparable loss and hardship. Hence, the writ petition. 3. The 2nd respondent filed counter affidavit denying the averments of the writ petition. It is stated that the temple is one of the famous and reputed temples in East Godavari District. The persons who render services to the deity are called Asaadis. The father of the petitioner never rendered his service as Asaadi for a single day in the temple. The petitioner was never appointed by the competent authority and there are no orders of appointing him as Asaadi in the 2nd respondent temple. The services of the petitioner utilized by the temple is only on temporary basis and his services were never regularized and as such he has no right to continue in the temple. The petitioner made representation on 17-12-1992 to appoint him as Asaadi in the temple and other Asaadis also reported no objection to utilize his services. Due to work load, the services of the petitioner were utilized from the year 1993 on a monthly salary of Rs.75/-, which has been enhanced from time to time and the last salary paid to the petitioner in the month of April, 2009 was Rs.600/-. Thereafter, the petitioner was absconding from duties without informing to the endowment officials. After lapse of two years, the petitioner now made a representation on 02-06-2011 to appoint him as Asaadi in the temple. The then Executive Officer forwarded the same to the Deputy Commissioner, Endowments, Kakinada for further orders. Hence, the 2nd respondent prays to dismiss the writ petition. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the petitioner gave a representation to appoint him as Asaadi in the 2nd respondent temple and the same was forwarded to the Deputy Commissioner, Endowments, Kakinada and therefore, necessary orders have to be passed. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent contended that the petitioner has given his resignation letter on 07-06-2011 without any compulsion, that the petitioner has categorically stated that he does not want to do any Asaadi duties in the temple and therefore, question of considering him as Asaadi does not arise. 6. The contention raised by the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent do not reflect in the counter affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent-Executive Officer. Even the 2nd respondent has categorically stated that the representation of the petitioner has been forwarded to the Deputy Commissioner, Endowments, Kakinada for passing necessary orders. Hence, appropriate decision has to be taken by the 1st respondent in accordance with the rules and regulations, Government orders and circular instructions. 7. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to take appropriate decision on the representation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the same to the petitioner. No order as to costs. ________________ K.C. BHANU, J DATED: 14-07-2011 Hsd