Sudeer Babu vs State Of Kerala on 2 December, 2010

Kerala High Court
Sudeer Babu vs State Of Kerala on 2 December, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 28819 of 2010(B)


1. SUDEER BABU, PUTHIYEDATH HOUSE,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. M.V.SASI, MARRAR HOUSE,
3. V.P.SHAJI, VADAKKEPARAMBIL HOUSE,
4. HARISH NAMBOOTHIRI, SHANTHI,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE COMMISSIONER, MALABAR

3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,

4. THE TRUSTEE, SREE THIRUVANGAYOOR

                For Petitioner  :SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER

                For Respondent  :SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN,SC,MALABAR DEVASWOM

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :02/12/2010

 O R D E R
                           S.SIRI JAGAN, J.

                     ==================

                      W.P.(C).No.28819 of 2010

                     ==================

             Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2010

                            J U D G M E N T

The petitioners are employees of the Sree Thiruvangayoor Shiva

Temple coming under the Malabar Devaswom Board. The said temple

is presently classified as a C Grade temple. According to the

petitioners, as per the norms applicable, the temple is liable to be

classified as a B grade temple. Therefore, the petitioners have filed

Exts.P11 representation before the 2nd respondent for re-classification

of the temple as a B Grade temple. For the present, the petitioners

would be satisfied with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider

and pass orders on Ext.P11 expeditiously.

2. I have heard the learned Standing Counsel for the

Devaswom Board as well as the learned counsel for the 4th respondent

Trustee of the temple.

3. Having heard all parties, I dispose of this writ petition with

a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on

Ext.P11, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the

petitioners as well as the 4th respondent, as expeditiously as possible,

at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a certified

copy of this judgment. It would be open to the petitioners to rely on

any recommendations or documents by any authority in support of

w.p.c.28819/10 2

their contentions, which shall also be duly considered by the 2nd

respondent.

Sd/-

sdk+                                        S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

          ///True copy///




                           P.A. to Judge

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *