IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2011 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 28466 of 2011(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M.G.REGHUNANDAN, SAMBANDHI, ARANMULA DEVASWOM, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, ARANMULA. BY ADV. MR. S.KRISHNAMOORTHY RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, NANTHANCODE, TRIVANDRUM-695 003. 2. DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, TRIVANDRUM-695 003. 3. ASST. COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, ARANMULA GROUP, ARANMULA-689 533. 4. S.MOHANAKUMAR, SAMBANDHI (PANCHAVADYAM) ARANMULA DEVASWOM, TRANVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, ARANMULA. 5. HARIKUMAR, SAMBANDHI (SANGHUVILI), ARANMULA DEVASWOM, ARANMULA-689 533. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. MR. G.BIJU,SC,TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) 28466 OF 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT. P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 19.08.2011 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER EXT. P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE SAID JUDGMENT IN WPC 25549/2011 DATED 26.09.2011 EXT. P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE TRANSFER GUIDELINES (CIRCULAR) DATED 19.01.2010 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT. P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE SAID REPRESENTATION DATED 24.10.2011 ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P (C) No. 28466 of 2011 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 3rd day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT The issue involved in this Writ Petition pertains to re-deployment of “Sambandhis” working at Aranmula Devaswom. The case of the petitioner is that, such re-deployment has to be effected by displacing the junior most hands. It is also pointed out that, this issue was taken up before this Court by the 4th respondent herein in W.P.(C) No. 25549 of 2011 and the same culminated in Ext. P2 judgment dated 26.09.2011, directing the second respondent therein to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext. P6 appeal preferred by the said petitioner, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the parties concerned. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has preferred Ext. P4 representation dated 24.10.2011 before the second respondent, pointing out certain aspects, which is also to be considered before finalization of the matter and hence this Writ Petition. 2. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent Board submits that the issue in this case is squarely covered by Ext. P2, wherein the petitioner herein was admittedly a party, having been impleaded as the additional 5th respondent. Though the said writ W.P. (C) No. 28466 of 2011 : 2 : petition was disposed at the admission stage before issuing notice to the 5th respondent i.e the petitioner herein, it is borne out from the operative portion of the judgment that the matter was ordered to be finalized, affording an opportunity of hearing to all the parties, including the petitioner herein. In the said circumstances, it is open for the petitioner to project all his grievances and contentions before the second respondent, in the course of hearing to be conducted pursuant to the verdict passed by this Court vide Ext. P2. No further orders are necessary in this Writ Petitioner and the same is closed accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd