High Court Kerala High Court

K.R.Sanjayan vs The Travancore Devaswom Board on 23 October, 2009

Kerala High Court
K.R.Sanjayan vs The Travancore Devaswom Board on 23 October, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 29962 of 2009(M)


1. K.R.SANJAYAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD
                       ...       Respondent

2. DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER,

3. ASST.DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, KOLLAM.

4. THE SUB-GROUP OFFICER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.ABHILASH

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :23/10/2009

 O R D E R
                        ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
               --------------------------------------------------
                  W.P.(C) NO.29962 OF 2009 (M)
               --------------------------------------------------
           Dated this the 23rd day of October, 2009

                            J U D G M E N T

Petitioner is a Santhi working in the Thiruvatta Devaswom. By

Ext.P2 order he has been transferred to Umayanalloor Devaswom.

His grievance is that on an earlier occasion, when he was threatened

with a transfer he had approached this court and filed WP(c).

Nos.16443/07 and 3339/09 which were disposed of by Ext.P1

judgment directing that the representation filed by the petitioner

shall be considered and orders passed. He submits that though in

Ext.P2 it is stated that the Board has passed an order, it was without

communicating the said order, that consequential order has been

passed and he is now been transferred.

The standing counsel for the Board has obtained instruction in

the matter. According to the Standing Counsel, Board has passed an

order as directed in Ext.P1 judgment as early as on 24.9.2009 and

that the same has been communicated to the Assistant Devaswom

Commissioner thorough the Devaswom Commissioner. It is stated

that it was thereupon that Ext.P2 has been issued implementing the

order dated 24.9.2009.

WPC.No.29962 /09
:2 :

Thus it is evident that the order passed pursuant to Ext.P1

judgment has not been communicated to the petitioner. If that be

so, in my view Ext.P2 is premature. Therefore I dispose of this writ

petition with the following directions.

Order dated 24.9.2009 mentioned in Ext.P2 shall be served on

the petitioner forthwith and in order to enable the petitioner to work

out the remedies if any against the said order it is directed that

Ext.P2 order of transfer shall be kept in abeyance for ten days from

today.

Petitioner may produce a copy of the judgment before the

respondent for compliance.




                                   (ANTONY DOMINIC)
vi                                        JUDGE