IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WPMP.No.8593 of 2009 and WRIT PETITION NO : 6573 of 2009 Between: K. Kalappa Naidu S/o. K. Anjaneyulu Naidu Now working on deputation as Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam, Triupathi, Chittoor District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam, rep. by its Executive Officer, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 2 Conservator of Forests, Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 3 Divisional Forest Officer, Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 4 Chief Conservator of Forests, Wild Life Management Circle, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri P.V.KRISHNAIAH Counsel for the Respondents: Sri S.VENKATESWARA RAO (SC FOR TTD) The Court made the following : Common Order: This is an application to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue as Deputy Range Officer of respondent No.1-Devasthanam. The petitioner was sent on deputation by the Forest Department to respondent No.1-Devasthanam vide proceedings dated 31-12-2008. He joined duty in respondent No.1-Devasthanam on 12-01-2009. By order dated 24-01-2009, respondent No.4- Chief Conservator of Forests, Wild Life Management, Tirupathi, placed the petitioner under Suspension. The said Suspension Order was questioned by the petitioner in O.A.No.1329 of 2009 before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, which admitted the same and suspended the Order of Suspension by Order dated 05-02- 2009. The grievance of the petitioner in this application is that despite the said Suspension Order of the Tribunal, he is not permitted to work by respondent No.1. Sri S.Srinivas representing learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1, placed before me parawise remarks sent on behalf of respondent No.1 wherein it is inter alia stated that following the suspension of the petitioner on 24- 01-2009, he was relieved from services of Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam on 25-01-2009. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that so far the petitioner’s deputation has not been cancelled and since, the only ground, on which the petitioner was relieved from the service of the respondent No.1-Devasthanam, was his suspension by his parent Department and the said suspension order is suspended by the Tribunal, respondent No.1 is not justified in not allowing the petitioner to continue in its service. It is for respondent No.1 to decide whether to continue the petitioner in its service or repatriate him to the parent Department. So long as the deputation order has not been cancelled and the order of petitioner’s suspension is under suspension, there can be no legal impediment for respondent No.1 to allow the petitioner to continue in its service. But respondent No.1 is entitled to decide on continuing the petitioner’s deputation. Therefore, respondent No.1 is directed to consider whether the petitioner will be continued in respondent No.1-Department or not, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If it decides to continue the petitioner on deputation, it shall consider permitting him to work so long as the deputation order subsists and his suspension order continues to be under suspension. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petition and WPMP are disposed of. ___________________________ (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) 28th April, 2008 LUR ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Executive Officer, Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 2 The Conservator of Forests, Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 3 The Divisional Forest Officer, Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 4 The Chief Conservator of Forests, Wild Life Management Circle, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 5 2 CD copies