The Andhra Pradesh High Court has ruled in favour of a temple employee whose seniority was revised nearly 16 years after his probation had been declared and several years after he had already earned promotion. Justice Balaji Medamalli held that the authorities could not reopen a settled seniority position after such a long delay, particularly without giving the employee an opportunity to be heard.
Background of the Case
The petitioner, Karothu Surya Narayana, was appointed as a Junior Assistant on compassionate grounds in 2007 in a temple governed by the Andhra Pradesh Endowments Department. His probation was declared in 2010, and he was promoted as Senior Assistant in 2017 after his seniority was taken into account. He continued to serve in that post without objection for several years.
However, while preparing a seniority list for promotion to the post of Superintendent, the temple authorities altered his position from Serial No. 1 to Serial No. 6. The revision was based on the view that his probation should have been treated as effective only from April 17, 2015, when he passed the Accounts Test. The authorities also initiated recovery proceedings alleging excess salary had been paid.
Court's Observations
The High Court noted that the petitioner's probation declaration and subsequent promotion had remained unquestioned for years. The Court found that the authorities attempted to reopen a settled issue far beyond the time limits prescribed under the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules.
Justice Balaji Medamalli observed,
“Once the seniority attained finality in view of the long service rendered by the employee... the same cannot be interdicted after long lapse of time.”
The Court also held that the petitioner was not given any notice or opportunity to explain before his seniority was altered.
The bench further observed,
“The action... without issuing any notice or without conducting any enquiry... is hit by the principles of natural justice.”
While examining the dispute, the Court relied on Supreme Court precedents holding that seniority generally flows from the date of appointment made according to the applicable rules and that long-settled service rights should not be unsettled after years without legal justification.
Decision
Allowing the writ petition, the Andhra Pradesh High Court set aside the proceedings dated May 27, 2023, revising the seniority list and the consequential order dated June 1, 2023.
The Court directed the temple authorities to restore the petitioner to his appropriate place in the seniority list and extend all consequential benefits, including promotion on par with his juniors.
Case Details
Case Title: Karothu Surya Narayana v. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Others
Case Number: Writ Petition No. 6546 of 2024
Judge: Justice Balaji Medamalli
Decision Date: 29 July 2026
-300x169.webp)
-300x169.webp)