IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID MONDAY, THE 26TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 4TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 25549 of 2011(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- S.MOHANAKUMAR, SAMBANDHI (PANCHAVADYAM), ARANMULA DEVASWOM, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, ARANMULA. BY ADV. MR.K.SASIKUMAR RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. TRAVANNCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. 2. COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. 3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, ARANMULA GROUP, ARANMULA - 689 533. 4. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, ARANMULA DEVASWOM, ARANMULA - 689 533. 5. M.G.REGHUNANDANAN NAIR, SAMBANDHI, ARANMULA DEVASWOM, ARANMULA. ADV.MR.G.BIJU, SC FOR TDB. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 25549 of 2011(P) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: CIRCULAR DTD. 10.2.2005 ISSUED BY R2. EXT.P2: ORDER DTD. 24.4.2008 ISSUED BY R3. EXT.P3: RELIEVING ORDER DTD. 6.7.2011 ISSUED BY SUB GROUP OFFICER, MURINGAMANGALAM. EXT.P4: ORDER DTD. 21.7.2011 ISSUED BY R2. EXT.P5: ORDER DTD. 27.7.2011 ISSUED BY R3. EXT.P6: APPEAL DTD. 3.8.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R2. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL ..... // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE. HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No.25549 Of 2011 ---------------------- Dated this the 26th day of September, 2011. J U D G M E N T Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for respondents 1 to 4. 2. The writ petition is filed seeking to quash Ext.P5 order issued by the 3rd respondent to the extent it relates to the petitioner, to declare that if at all any redeployment of 'Sambandhi' is required in Aranmula Devaswom, it is the 5th respondent who is entitled to be transferred, for a direction directing respondents 1 to 3 to retain the petitioner as 'Sambandhi' in Aranmula Devaswom, to direct the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P6 appeal and for other incidental reliefs. 3. The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P5 order to the extend it relates to the petitioner. By Ext.P5 issued by the 3rd respondent, the petitioner is transferred from Aranmula Devaswom to Prayar Devaswom, stating redeployment of employees. According to the petitioner, if at all any redeployment of 'Sambandhi' is required in Aranmula Devaswom, it is the 5th respondent who has been now overstaying beyond a period of three years at Aranmula Devaswom itself. ::2:: W.P.(C).No.25549 Of 2011 4. When the matter was taken up for consideration in the admission list today, the learned standing counsel for the Devaswom submits that the writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P6 appeal within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner also agreed for the same. 5. In view of the limited relief sought for, this Court is of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of without issuing notice to the 5th respondent. 6. In the facts and circumstances of the case, a direction is issued to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P6 appeal, within a period of one month from today, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, 5th respondent and other affected parties, if any. The operation of Ext.P5 order, so far it relates to the petitioner, shall be kept in abeyance till the disposal of Ext.P6 appeal, if the petitioner is not already relieved. The writ petition is disposed of as above. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. bkn/-