IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 25TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 30554 of 2011(T) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- S.SANTHOSH KUMAR, SANTHOSH BHAVAN, EDATHITTA P.O., KODUMON, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.S.MUHAMMED HANEEFF SRI.R.KRISHNAKUMAR (CHERTHALA) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DEVASWOM BOARD BUILDINGS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SECRETARY, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, DEVASWOM BOARD BUILDINGS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI. G. BIJU SC., TDB. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S WPC.NO. 30554/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DT. 22-10-2006 IN OP NO. 29027 OF 2002 ON THE FILE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. P2: COPY OF THE LIST NO.III OF LD CLERKS UNDER THE DYING IN HARNESS SCHEME PREPARED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DT. 18-11-03. P3: COPY OF THE CONSENT GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENTS DT. 18-04-2006. P4: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO. ROC 9529/01 EST:4 DT. 2-12-2006 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P5: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE PRESIDENT OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DT. 8-11-11. P6: COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY SRI. RAJU ABRAHAM MLA TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DT. 11-11-11. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE S K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J --------------------------------------------- W.P.(c)No.30554 of 2011 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of November 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the son of late Sadananda Sarma who died on 13.7.2001, in harness, while working as an Administrative Officer under the first respondent. The petitioner had submitted an application for appointment under the dying in harness scheme. Since the petitioner and his entire family were depending on the income of their father for their sustenance, the petitioner was finding it very difficult to tide over the situation created by the death of late Sadananda Sarma. Therefore, the petitioner approached this Court by filing O.P.No.29027 of 2002, which was disposed of by Ext.P1 judgment. 2. Pursuant to Ext.P1 judgment, the petitioner's application was processed and his name was included in the list for appointment as clerks as Sl.No.31, as evidenced by Ext.P2. At that time, the petitioner was informed that appointment from the said list, depending WPC No.30554 of 2011 2 on the availability of vacancies, would take a long time. Since the petitioner's family was without any source of income, the petitioner requested for being provided with some other employment in the Board. As required by the respondents, he also submitted Ext.P3 consent letter. The said consent letter was considered and the petitioner's name was included in the list of Peons, after deleting him from the list of Clerks. However, in spite of the above, he did not get any appointment. While so, a Division Bench of this Court has issued orders directing the first respondent to make appointments from the list of Clerks and to exhaust the said list. Therefore, there is an imminent possibility of the petitioner getting the appointment that he had initially sought for. The petitioner has therefore submitted Ext.P5 representation to the first respondent seeking appointment as a Clerk, after restoring his earlier seniority position as Sl.No.31. The petitioner complains that no orders have been passed on Ext.P5, till date. 3. Since Ext.P5 is pending consideration of the second respondent, I am of opinion that this writ petition WPC No.30554 of 2011 3 can be disposed of directing the same to be considered without delay. 4. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner, evidenced herein by Ext.P5, in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment or before the appointments from the list of Clerks are finalised, whichever is earlier. Sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE true copy P.S.TO JUDGE css/