IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2009 / 23RD ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 29011 OF 2009(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- THAMARAKULAM VASUDEVAN NAMBOOTHIRI, SHANTHI, THALIYIL SIVA TEMPLE, RESIDING AT 18/587,THALI, CHALAPPURAM P.O. KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, NANDANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. COMMISIONR,TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SABARIMALA, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANDANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. S.C. FOR TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD- SRI. V. KRISHNA MENON. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN & T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = == == = = = W.P.(C) NO. 29011 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2009. J U D G M E N T Raman, J. Petitioner was an applicant for the post of Melsanthi at Sabarimala and Malikapuram for the year 1185-1186 M.E. (2009-2010). He submitted his application along with the testimonials and initially he was called for the interview. But subsequently, he was informed that he does not possess the requisite qualification as contained in Clause (6) of the notification . The intimation in this regard was conveyed to him by Ext.P8. Aggrieved by the rejection of his application, petitioner has come up with this writ petition. 2. It is contended that the petitioner has the requisite qualification as prescribed and he placed reliance on Exts.P5 and P6 certificates produced along with the writ petition. Though in Ext.P6 he has been certified as 'Prasada Santhi' working in Thali Devaswom, Kozhikode, it is contended that 'Prasada Santhi' referred to in Ext.P6 means only that he was the Melsanthi. It is further submitted that there are sub-deities in the Temple, the Santhies perform the duties as W.P.(C) 29011/2009 2 Melsanthi of the main deity by turn every month, there are two Melsanthies who thus work on turn and while one of them is the Melsanthi in the main shrine, the other is doing poojas for the sub deities. However, the question as to whether 'Prasada Santhi' should be taken as 'Melsanthi' of the major temple being a question of fact, it may not be possible at this last hour to take a final decision, that too pertaining to a question of fact. Further, the interview is already over and the final selection will be done on 1st of Thulam (M.E.) ie. on 17.10.2009 and therefore, the writ petition at this belated stage does not merit consideration. 3. In these circumstances, learned counsel seeks to withdraw the writ petition without prejudice to the petitioner's right to seek appropriate modification in the scheme, at least for the coming years. He also submits that the rejection of his application may not stand in the way of his being submitting his applications for being considered for the post, next time. Since an amendment to the scheme is to be made, and the present writ petition does not pertain to the amendments made in the existing guidelines prescribed, it is not to be dealt with in this proceeding. This is a matter to be dealt with at appropriate time as and when report of the Ombudsman is submitted before this Court pursuant to the final selection made to the Melsanthi. W.P.(C) 29011/2009 3 4. Since we have not gone to the merits of the contention, the dismissal of this writ petition will not affect his right, if any, in seeking modification to the scheme. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed subject to the above. P.R. RAMAN, (JUDGE) T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, (JUDGE) KNC/-