IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.MANJULA CHELLUR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 18TH KARTHIKA 1933 WA.No. 1651 of 2011 ---------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.18184/2011 Dated 29/08/2011 .................... APPELLANT(S): ---------------------- JAYAPRAKASHAN.K., S/O.KUTTISANKARAN NAIR (LATE), AGED 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT KATTIRI HOUSE, P.O. KULUKKALLOOR, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER SRI.ANEESH JOSEPH SMT.P.M.SHIJI RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, ERNAHIPALAM P.O.-673 006, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SREE MULAYAMKUNNU BHAGAVATHI DEVASWOM, MULAYANKAVU, KULUKKALLUR, PALAKKAD-679 337. ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN,SC,MALABAR DEVASWOM FOR R1 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MANJULA CHELLUR, Ag.C.J & C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.A.No. 1651 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Manjula Chellur, Ag.C.J. This appeal is against the judgment of the learned Single Judge in W.P(C).No. 18184 of 2011 dated 29.8.2011. It is not in dispute that the appellant herein is working as a Velichapadu in Sree Mulayankavu Bhagavathi Devaswom situated in Palakkad. 2. The allegation against the respondents by the appellant is that though he was paid monthly salary from 2007 to 2010, suddenly, without giving any opportunity of being heard, the authorities of the Devawom discontinued the payment of monthly salary. Therefore, he approached the Court. 3. The learned Single Judge, after referring to the scheduled persons, whose services are mentioned as salaried employees, found that Velichapadu is not one of the scheduled employees and other similarly placed persons like Vadhyams are also not paid regular salaries. According to the appellant, his services are required in the Devaswom regularly and almost every day he would perform rituals required by the devotees, who come after booking ritual of Guruthi. WA.1651/11 2 Therefore, it is a job he has to perform every day and it has to be on a permanent basis and he must also get monthly salary. Undisputedly, the fact remains that the appellant was not selected after selection process and his performance as Velichapadu in the respective Devaswom is only by hereditary and there is no retirement from the said duties. As long as he would be able to perform the duties of Velichapadu, he would remain in the concerned Devaswom and he would get the charges fixed by the Devaswom for each ritual or performance. We are also aware of the fact that the devotees who come to Devaswom to get these rituals done would also pay some Dakshina to the Velichapadu and this is apart from what is fixed per ritual by the Devaswom. Apart from that, his hereditary office would go to his successor from the family. Therefore, the claim of the appellant that he has to be treated on par with monthly salaried employees cannot be accepted. We are of the opinion that the learned Single Judge was justified in rejecting the claim of the appellant. Accordingly the Writ Appeal is dismissed. MANJULA CHELLUR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE vgs