IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 1ST JUNE 2010 / 11TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 16707 of 2010(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. N.P.VINODKUMAR, JUNIOR ACCOUNTANT, PARASSINIKADAVU SREE MUTHAPPAN TEMPLE, PARASSINIKADAVU, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. M.P.SUNESH, ATTENDER, -DO- -DO- 3. C.K.SAJUL, MAT BOY, -DO- -DO- 4. P.M.KRISHNAPRIYESH, ROOM BOY, -DO- -DO- 5. P.M.SHYBINDH, RECEPTIONIST, -DO- -DO- BY ADV. SRI.KRB.KAIMAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE TEMPLE COMMITTEE OF PARASSINIKADAVU SREE MUTHAPPAN TEMPLE, REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER - ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM ROAD, KASARAGOD AT NEELESWARAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, NEELESWARAM, KASARAGOD. 4. THE TRUSTEE AND GENERAL MANAGER, PARASSINIKADAVU SREE MUTHAPPAN TEMPLE, PARASSINIKADAVU, KANNUR. ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN,SC,MALABAR DEVASWOM FOR R1,3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.16707 OF 2010 (K) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the Ist day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Heard both sides. Exts.P1 to P3 are the orders issued by the 4th respondent appointing the petitioners as Junior Accountant, Attender, Mat Boy, Room Boy and Receptionist in the services of the 4th respondent. Apparently, in pursuance to Ext.P5, the first respondent has issued Ext.P4 proceedings to the 4th respondent directing termination of the service of the petitioners. On the basis of Ext.P4 when the 4th respondent initiated further steps for impelemnting the said order this writ petition has been filed. 2. Although several contentions have been raised on the merits of the order itself, still having regard to the fact that Ext.P4 order was issued without putting the petitioners on notice or giving them an opportunity to file objections or hearing them, I do not think it is necessary for this court to enter into the controversy at least at this stage. WPC.No.16707 /2010 :2 : 3. In the circumstances I dispose of this writ petition directing that Ext.P4 shall be treated as notices, requiring the petitioners to file their objections to the proposal mentioned therein. It is directed that it will be open to the petitioners to file their objections to Ext.P4 within 10 days from today and if such objections are filed, the first respondent shall issue notice hearing the petitioners and pass fresh orders in the matter. Until orders are passed in the matter as above, status quo as on date in so far as the service of the petitioners shall be continued. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/