IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2009 / 31ST ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 3332 of 2009(V) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- P.N.RAMAN NAMBOOTHIRI, S/O.NEELAKANTAN NAMBOOTHIRI, PULIMATTATHILLAM, KAIPATTOOR.PO, (VIA),ARAKKUANNAM, DIST.ERNAKULAM. BY ADVS. MR.K.REGHU KOTTAPPURAM, MR.M.MUKESH. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, TRIPUNITHURA,ERNAKULAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER,COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, THRISSUR. 3. THE SECRETARY,COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, THRISSUR. R1 TO R3 BY MR. K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP,SC,COCHIN D.B. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/07/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P.(C) No. 3332 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT Heard Sri.K.Reghu Kottappuram, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. P.Gopalakrishna Kurup, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Cochin Devaswom Board. 2. The petitioner is a pensioner. He retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30-6-2008, while he was serving in Sree Poornathrayeesa Temple at Tripunithura. Thereupon, by Ext.P2 order dated 20-10-2008 the petitioner was sanctioned D.C.R.G. and pension. Ext.P2 describes the petitioner as Tirthamani. This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the quantum of pension and D.C.R.G. sanctioned to him. He has also a grievance that D.C.R.G. has not been fixed based on the last pay drawn by him. He claims that he was a Santhi in an A group temple and that he was in service since 1982. 3. Ext.P1 discloses that the service of the petitioner was regularized with effect from 14-1-1987 as Santhi in an A group temple. The Cochin Devaswom Board justifies the description of the petitioner as Tirthamani in Ext.P2 on the ground that he was reverted from the post of Santhi in view of W.P.(C) No. 3332/09 2 a disciplinary action initiated against him in the year 1993 and finalized in the year 1994. On going through the writ petition and after hearing the submissions made at the Bar, to me it appears that the dispute centres round the question whether the petitioner was a Santhi or Tirthamani as stated in Ext.P2. The length of service is also in dispute. In my opinion, in the nature of the dispute, the petitioner should have moved the Cochin Devaswom Board before seeking the intervention of this Court. It is brought to my notice that the petitioner has already filed Ext.P3 representation dated 5-1- 2009 before the Secretary, Cochin Devaswom Board. It is also brought to my notice that that the term of the members of the Cochin Devaswom Board has expired and that presently the Special Devaswom Commission is discharging the functions of the Board. Since the dispute raised by the petitioner relates to length of service which he had rendered and also his designation, I am of the opinion that the Cochin Devaswom Board should consider the grievance voiced by him in the first instance. I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the Special Commissioner of the Cochin Devaswom Board to consider Ext.P3 representation and take a decision thereon after affording the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of being heard. It will be open to the petitioner to file an additional representation setting out all his contentions. Final orders W.P.(C) No. 3332/09 3 in this matter shall be passed within three months from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment before the Special Commissioner. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. mn.