IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2008 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 15675 of 2008(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ A.R.NARAYANAN, AGED 36 YEARS S/O. A.M. RAMACHANDRAN EMBRANTHIRI, ANILAKKAD MANNA, KARINGARAPULLI POST, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. COMMISSIONER, HINDU RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS, CALICUT. 2. EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SREE MANAPULLI BHAGAVATHY DEVASWOM, PALAKKAD. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (DEVASWOM) TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.R.SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 15675 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 27th May, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is serving as a Clerk in the Manapully Bhagavathy Devaswom. He was appointed under the Dying in harness taking note of the fact that his father passed away while in harness. 2. While so, a post of Melsanthi arose in the said temple and applications were invited from qualified persons as evidenced by Exhibit P4. Notification as such does not restrict the persons who are serving in the temple from applying for the post. It seems that the petitioner approached the Executive Officer for a No Objection Certificate to apply for the said post as he is qualified to discharge the duties as Melsanthi. The same has been rejected under Exhibit P5 dated 17.5.2008. 3. Petitioner challenges Exhibit P5. Exhibit P5 should be considered either as an order refusing a no objection certificate or decision taken by the Executive officer not to permit the petitioner to participate in the selection for the post W.P ( C) No. 15675 of 2008 2 of Melsanthi. The said decision of the Executive Officer is capable of revision by the Commissioner under Section 18 of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951. In my view, the petitioner is entitled to avail the alternative remedy in this regard. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to file a revision against Exhibit P5 before the Commissioner-the 1st respondent. If it is done within three weeks from today, orders shall be passed on the said revision within a period of two months thereafter. If the petitioner files an application for stay or any other interim relief, orders shall be passed thereon, within one week from the date of moving the application. Filling up of the vacancies notified under Exhibit P4 shall be kept in abeyance for a period of four weeks from today and shall thereafter abide by the orders to be passed by the Commissioner, as aforementioned. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 15675 of 2008 2 K.THANKAPPAN,J CRL.A. NO.92 OF 1999 ORDER W.P ( C) No. 15675 of 2008 2 25th May, 2007 Common issues are raised for consideration in all these writ petitions. Reference is made to the facts in Writ Petition No.4562/2008 for the sake of convenience.