IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 27TH JUNE 2011 / 6TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 16911 of 2011(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- K.V. RAMACHANDRAN POTTI, KOLLANATHMADON, KODUVAZHANGA, NEERKKODU PO ALANGAD 683 511. BY ADVS. SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANDANCODE PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 2. THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT NANDANCODE PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 3. THE ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM 683 513. 4. VISHNU NAMBOODIRI MELSANTHI, THRIKKAKARA PATTUPURAKKAVU TEMPLE THRIKKAKARA PO, ERNAKULAM 682 021. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI. G. BIJU, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 16911 of 2011(L) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19-5-2011. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 7-6-2011. EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10-6-2011. EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE GUIDELINE ISSUED BY THE DEVASWOM BOARD DATED 14-2-2005. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 16911 of 2011 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 27th day of June, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a Santhi working at Eravipuram Mahadeva Kshethram for the last 3 years. At the time of general transfer, the petitioner opted for Pattupurakkavu, (Thrikkakara), Kannankulangara and Markanteswaram temples. The petitioner was given a transfer to Pattupurakkavu by Ext. P1 order of transfer. But, on an appeal filed by the 4th respondent, the same has been cancelled and the 4th respondent has been given Pattupurakkavu station. The petitioner was accommodated at Naranam temple. The petitioner is aggrieved by the same. 2. The learned standing counsel for the Board submits that at Pattupurakkavu, the 4th respondent had a better claim because of station seniority and the fact that the petitioner had earlier worked at Pattupurakkavu. As far as the other two stations are concerned, the persons working there did not complete the 3 year period stipulated in the guidelines. That is why the petitioner was given transfer to Naranam temple. 3. In view of the above submission, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to file an appropriate appeal before the 1st respondent. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: If the petitioner files an appropriate appeal before the 1st respondent, the 1st respondent shall consider and pass orders thereon, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as others who may be affected by an order in W.P(C) No. 16911 of 2011 -: 2 :- favour of the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of the appeal. The petitioner shall file the appeal within two weeks from today. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/