IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 34619 of 2008(U)
1. PARAMESWARANA NAMBOOTHIRI,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, REP. BY ITS
... Respondent
2. DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER,
3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
4. DEVASWOM OFFICER, TRIPUNITHURA
5. LEKSHMINARAYANAN, MELSANTHI,
For Petitioner :SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY
For Respondent :SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP,SC,COCHIN D.B
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :27/03/2009
O R D E R
T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J
--------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 34619 of 2008
---------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 27th day of March, 2009
JUDGMENT
The petitioner while working as Melsanthi at Thiruvanchikulam
Mahadeva Temple was given a posting in Kannamkulangara Siva
Temple as per Ext.P1 order. There was some difficulty for joining
there because of administrative delay and he approached this Court
by filing W.P.(C) No.4927 of 2008. While so, by Ext.P2 order he was
given a posting at Palliparampukavu Devi Temple. Petitioner
thereafter joined duty as Melsanti at Palliparampukavu Devi Temple
on 19.2.2008. This writ petition is filed challenging his transfer from
the said Temple. Pending this writ petition, this Court by interim
order dated 25.11.2008 directing respondents 1 to 4 to retain the
petitioner at Palliparampukavu Devi Temple.
2. The order of transfer is produced as Ext.R5(a). The 5th
respondent who was working in Kannamkulangara Siva Temple was
posted instead of the petitioner to the Palliparampukavu Devi Temple
where the petitioner is working.
3. When the matter came up for hearing on 4.3.2009, the
learned standing counsel for the Devaswom Board submitted that the
5th respondent will be given a suitable posting. Accordingly there
was a direction to the Board to pass appropriate orders within a
period of ten days. Thereafter, orders have been passed on 23.3.2009
wpc: 34619 of 2008,21162
2
giving a posting to the 5th respondent to the Kannamkulangara Siva
Temple. Ext.R5(a) therefore, does not survive.
4. It is reported by the learned standing counsel for the Devaswom
Board and the learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent that the
5th respondent has already joined there.
5. In that view of the matter as the 5th respondent has already
been posted in a different temple, the petitioner will not have any
subsisting grievance. Hence, he will be retained in Pallipparambukavu
Devi Temple.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,
JUDGE
bps