Ranjith vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 3503 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

                                    &

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI

     MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 12TH MAGHA,1942

                        WA.No.159 OF 2021
 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 22177/2020(V) DATED 18.12.2020        OF
                     THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

              RANJITH
              AGED 38 YEARS
              S/O.DAMODARAN NAIR, KARAKKATTIL HOUSE, MOKAVAOOR,
              ERANHIKKAL P.O, KOZHIKODE.

              BY ADVS.
              SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN
              SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

         1    STATE OF KERALA
              REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
              REVENUE DEVASWOM DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001

         2    MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD,
              REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HOUSEFED COMPLEX,
              ERANJIPALAM, KOZHIKODE-673 006

         3    THE COMMISSIONER,
              MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, HOUSEFED COMPLEX,
              ERANHIPALAM,KOZHIKODE-673 006

         4    KERALA DEVASWOM RECRUITMENT BOARD,
              REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NANTHANCODE,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003

              R2-R3 BY ADV. SRI.R.LAKSHMI NARAYANAN(B/O)

              SRI.B.VINOD, SR.GP,       SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR- R4

     THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.02.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.A No.159 of 2021
                                          2




             ALEXANDER THOMAS & T.R.RAVI, JJ.
             ==================================
                             W.A No.159 of 2021
                     [arising out of the judgment dated 18.12.2020
                               in W.P(C) No.22177/2020]
             ==================================
                      Dated this the 01st day of February, 2021

                                  JUDGMENT

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

The aforecaptioned Writ Appeal has been filed to impugn the

judgment dated 18.12.2020 rendered by this Court in

W.P(C)No.22177/2020 filed by the writ appellant herein.

2. Heard Sri.K.Mohanakannan, learned counsel appearing for

the writ appellant / writ petitioner, Sri.R.Lakshmi Narayan, learned

Standing Counsel for the Malabar Devaswom Board appearing for

respondent Nos.2 & 3, Sri.V.V.Nandagopal Nambiar, learned Standing

Counsel for the Kerala Devaswom Recruitment Board appearing for the

4th respondent & Sri.B.Vinod, learned Senior Government Pleader

appearing for the 1st respondent-State of Kerala.

3. Today when the matter has been taken up for consideration,

Sri.R.Lakshmi Narayan, learned Standing Counsel for the Malabar

Devaswom Board appearing for respondent Nos.2 & 3 would submit on W.A No.159 of 2021

the basis of instructions that the said respondent-Malabar Devaswom

Board had filed review petition R.P No.82/2021 before the learned Single

Judge, seeking review of the very same impugned judgment dated

18.12.2020 in W.P(C)No.22177/2020, more particularly, about the

aspects borne out from paragraph Nos.4 & 5 of the impugned judgment

of the W.P(C), pertaining to one Sri.M.T.Mahesh. Further that, the

learned Single Judge has disposed of R.P No.82/2021, as per order dated

28.01.2021 and has deleted the directions in paragraph No.5 of the

impugned judgment about the necessity to remove from service the

abovesaid Sri.M.T.Mahesh and fresh appointment is completed by the

Recruitment Board and has consequently directed the competent

authority of the respondent-State Government to reconsider the case of

the petitioner for regularization in service, etc. From the submissions on

both sides, it appears that the said direction to reconsider would be in the

light of the regularization given in favour of Sri.M.T.Mahesh, a driver,

who was initially provisionally appointed in service and later regularized,

etc.

4. Sri.K.Mohanakannan, learned counsel appearing for the writ

appellant / writ petitioner would confirm the correctness of the factual

submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent- W.A No.159 of 2021

Malabar Devaswom Board and would submit that so far the certified

copy of the final order dated 28.01.2021 rendered by the learned Single

Judge in R.P No.82/2021 (arising out of W.P(C)No.22177/2020), has not

been obtained and would further submit that in the light of these aspects,

the challenge in this writ appeal has become practically infructuous.

5. Accordingly, the submissions of both sides are recorded and

all contentions available in law to the writ appellant are left open, to be

raised and decided in appropriate proceedings, in the manner known to

law and the above writ appeal will consequently stand disposed of as

infructuous.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE

Sd/-

T.R.RAVI, JUDGE

vgd