IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 30795 of 2011(Y) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- RAJU.R.G., T.C.23/680, KIZHAKKE MADAM, VALIYASALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.R.SUNIL KUMAR, SMT.A.SALINI LAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695003. 2. THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER OFFICE, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695003. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI. G.BIJU, SC, TDB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: DG WPC.NO.30795/2011 Y APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION GIVEN TO 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 15/09/11. P2: COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE DG K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.30795 of 2011-Y. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 18th November, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is an employee of the first respondent, presently working as Poojari at Rameswaram Siva Temple which is under the Neyyattinkara group. He had joined the first respondent Board as a Poojari on 23.3.1991 and has been working as such, ever since. The petitioner complains that he has not been paid the benefits of the salary revision that was effected from time to time. Therefore, his salary continues to be Rs.5,680/-. His day to day expenses and the expenses of his family are solely dependent on his meager income. Though the petitioner has submitted Ext.P1 representation seeking the benefits of the revision of salary, he complains that the same has not been considered till date. The counsel for the petitioner therefore seeks the issue of appropriate directions for the consideration and WP(C).No.30795/2011-Y. 2 disposal of Ext.P1. 2. I have heard Sri.G.Biju, learned Standing Counsel for the Travancore Devaswom Board also. 3. In view of the limited relief that is claimed by the petitioner, this writ petition itself is being disposed of at the admission state itself. In the above circumstance, this writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner, evidenced herein by Ext.P1, in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, (Judge) Kvs/-