IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 17TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 10020 of 2010(B) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- C.D.GOPINATHAN PILLAI, PRESIDENT, SREEKRISHNA SWAMY KSHETHRA UPADESAKA SAMITHI, BUDHANNOOR WEST, RESIDING AT G.S.BHAWAN, BUDHANNOOR P.O., CHENGANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL) SRI.A.R.DILEEP SRI.GEORGE RAJU SMT.SURYA SASI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANTHANCODE, KOWDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT. 2. COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANTHANCODE, KOWDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, ARANMULA GROUP, ARANMULA, ALAPPUZHA. BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.K.N.VENUGOPALA PANICKER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.10020 of 2010-B ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 8th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: “a. to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Ist and 2nd respondents to appoint a full time Santhi, Kazhakam, Watchman and a Sweeper. b. to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to consider and pass orders on Exhibit P1 within such time as may be fixed by this Honourable Court.” 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: There is a duty on the part of the respondents to appoint a full time Santhi, Kazhakam, Watchman and a Sweeper and there is failure to do so. Petitioner submitted Ext.P1 representation. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Learned standing counsel for the respondents would submit that the representation is addressed to the Ist respondent WPC No.10020/2010 -2- Board. But, he would submit that a decision can be taken in the matter by the 2nd respondent who is authorised to take a decision. It is submitted by the petitioner that copy of Ext.P1 has been served on the 2nd respondent. In the circumstance of the case we dispose of the writ petition by directing the 2nd respondent to consider and take a decision on Ext.P1 in accordance with law within a period of one month from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) JUDGE. MS