High Court Kerala High Court

Suresh R.Potty vs The Chief Commissioner on 15 October, 2009

Kerala High Court
Suresh R.Potty vs The Chief Commissioner on 15 October, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 18006 of 2009(U)


1. SURESH R.POTTY, MELSANTHI,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD,

3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,

4. THE SUB GROUP OFFICER,

5. MOHANAN C.K., PRESIDENT,

6. GOPINATHAN.P., SECRETARY,

7. THRIPPAKKUDAM MAHADEVA

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

 Dated :15/10/2009

 O R D E R
       P.R. RAMAN & P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JJ.
               ...............................................................................
                        W.P.(C) No. 18006 OF 2009
                .........................................................................
                      Dated this the 15th October, 2009

                                     J U D G M E N T

P.R. Raman, J:

This Writ Petition is filed seeking for a writ of mandamus

directing the first respondent to initiate action on Exts. P1 to P5

complaints and also on the report of the Assistant Devaswom

Commissioner, pursuant to Ext.P1 and initiate action to dissolve

the 7th respondent Samithy . Subsequently, an order was

passed by this Court on 24.09.2009, recording the submission

made by the learned Standing Counsel that Vigilance Enquiry

Report has been received and that the matter is under

consideration. Therefore, a further direction to initiate action is

not called for. However, regarding the dissolution of the

Samithy is concerned, we directed that if there is any move for

extension to the present Samithy, the same shall be granted,

after obtaining permission from this Court.

2. It is brought to the notice of this Court that subsequently

W.P.(C) No. 18006 OF 2009

2

the 7th respondent-Samithy has been dissolved and a new

Committee has been inducted. In the factual situation, no

further relief can be granted in this Writ Petition.

3. The petitioner has now filed I.A.No.12743 of 2009

bringing certain grievances to the notice of this Court and also

seeking for a new relief, viz., regarding the constitution of new

Samithy, which assumed the office after dissolution of the earlier

Samithy. According to him, some of the members inducted in

the new Samithy have some disqualification. This is not a

subject connected with the main relief sought for in the Writ

Petition for the reason that paragraph No.4 gives names of the

persons inducted in the new Samithy against whom some

enquiry is pending. On a cursory glance, it can be seen that

many of them are not made parties in the Writ Petition since

that Writ Petition was filed against the erstwhile Samithy. In

the said circumstances, the prayer made in the I.A.No. 12743 of

2009 cannot be granted, which will not sub serve the main relief

sought for in the Writ Petition. However, it is open to the

W.P.(C) No. 18006 OF 2009

3

petitioner to ventilate the grievances raised in the I.A. No.12743

of 2009 by filing an appropriate Writ Petition, if so advised.

The Writ Petition is accordingly closed.

P.R. RAMAN,
JUDGE.

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE.

lk