IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 22ND AUGUST 2008 / 31ST SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 21975 of 2008(N) PETITIONER: ------------ P.K.SAJI, S/O.C.K.DAMODARAN, AGED 28 YEARS, CHENGALAI PO., SREEKANDAPURAM, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM REP. BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR, GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR. 2. MANAGING COMMITTEE, GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR. 3. PRINCIPAL, SREEKRISHNA COLLEGE, GURUVAYUR. R1 AND R2 BY ADV. SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 21975 OF 2008 N -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd August, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner was a Peon working in Sree Krishna College, Guruvayur, for the period from June, 2000 to March, 2004. The College is managed by the Guruvayur Devaswom functioning under the Guruvayur Devaswom Act. The College is affiliated to the University of Calicut. 2. O.P.No.14594 of 2002 was filed by the petitioner and twelve others seeking for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the State Government and the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education to regularize the service of the petitioners therein as last grade servants in the Sree Krishna College, Guruvayur. That Original Petition was disposed of as per Ext.P1 judgment dated 9.3.2004. In Ext.P1 judgment, the Division Bench left the matter for the decision of the Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee and the Government to pass appropriate orders. 3. Later, petitioner and twelve others filed W.P.(C) No.12083 of 2004, which was disposed of along with some connected cases as per Ext.P2 judgment dated 29.7.2004. W.P.(C) No.12083 of 2004 was preferred seeking to quash the orders passed by the Managing Committee. In Ext.P2 judgment, the Division Bench held thus: W.P.(C) NO.21975 OF 2008 :: 2 :: “The managing committee has rejected the request by Ext.P11 order dated 31.3.2004 since the petitioners were engaged only on a contract basis. The managing committee referred to G.O.(Rt).858/03/H.Edn. dated 19.6.03 and pointed out that the appointment of non teaching staff could be made only after the staff pattern is approved. Further committee also noted that it could effect regular appointment only after following the procedure laid down under statute 43 of the Calicut University First Statute 1974. We find force in the contentions of the counsel appearing for the managing committee. Petitioners cannot have march over those persons who are expecting permanent appointment when the managing committee issues notification for filling up of the post on a regular basis on approved staff pattern. Under such circumstance we find no illegality in the order passed by the managing committee. Counsel appearing for the managing committee submitted that a direction be given to the Government to approve the staff pattern in the college otherwise it will not be possible for the managing committee to proceed with the regular appointment. Under such circumstance there will be a direction to the 5th respondent in W.P.(C). 12083/04 to consider the request for the approval of the staff pattern so that regular appointment could be made. Petitioners could also apply if they are otherwise eligible.” 4. It is submitted that the Government have not approved the staff pattern in the College. The petitioner submitted Ext.P3 representation to the Managing Committee of the Devaswom to reconsider the issue and to re-employ the petitioner and the twelve persons. The relief prayed for in the Writ Petition is to issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 to 3 to appoint the petitioner as Peon in the Sree Krishna College based on the rank list. In view of Ext.P2 judgment, I do not think that the prayer made by the petitioner can be entertained. W.P.(C) NO.21975 OF 2008 :: 3 :: The Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed. However, it is made clear that this judgment would not preclude the petitioner from resorting to other remedies, if any, open to him under law. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/