Sandeep.S Kumar vs The Travancore Devaswom Board
2023 Latest Caselaw 7834 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
     WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 4TH SRAVANA, 1945
                      WP(C) NO. 21842 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

             SANDEEP.S KUMAR
             AGED 34 YEARS
             S/O SOMAN NAIR, FULL TIME THALI, ERATTAKULANGARA
             DEVASWOM, THRIPERUMTHURA SUB GROUP, MAVELIKKARA
             GROUP, RESIDING AT SANDEEP BHAVANAM, CHENNITHALA
             P.O, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690105
             BY ADVS.
             PRATHEESH.P
             ANJANA KANNATH


RESPONDENTS:

      1      THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD
             REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TDB BUILDING,
             NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -, PIN - 695001
      2      THE COMMISSIONER
             TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANTHANCODE,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -, PIN - 695001
      3      THE ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER
             TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, MAVELIKKARA GROUP,
             ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690101
      4      THE SUB GROUP OFFICER
             THRIPERUMTHURA SUB GROUP, ERATTAKULANGARA,
             ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688561
       THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   26.07.2023,   THE   COURT    ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 21842 OF 2023
                             2



                         JUDGMENT

The petitioner says that he is working as a 'Thali' in the

services of the 'Travancore Devaswom Board' (TDB) and that he

has preferred Ext.P5 representation for category change to

'Kazhakam'. He says that he was constrained to do so on

account of medical grounds; but that his request has not yet

been considered and thus, that he has been constrained to

approach this Court.

2. In response to the afore submissions of Sri.Pratheesh P.

- the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.C.K.Pavithran -

learned Standing Counsel for TDB, submitted that if the

petitioner only requires Ext.P5 representation to be taken up

and disposed of in terms of law, there does not appear to be any

legal impediment in doing so; however, praying that this Court

may not make any affirmative declarations on his entitlement to

any relief and leave it to be decided by the Competent Authority,

in terms of law.

3. Taking note of the afore submissions, I allow this Writ

Petition direct the 2nd respondent (who is stated to be the WP(C) NO. 21842 OF 2023

Competent Authority by Sri.C.K.Pavitrhan), to take up Ext.P5

representation of the petitioner and dispose of the same,

adverting to his medical condition and after affording him an

opportunity of being heard; thus culminating in an appropriate

order and necessary action thereon, as expeditiously as is

possible, but not later than two months from the date of receipt

of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE lsn WP(C) NO. 21842 OF 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21842/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE COPY OF THE ORDER IN ROC NO.13488/2012/MIS. DATED 24.9.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P2 THE COPY OF THE ORDER IN ROC NO.9711/21/EST-B/EST-A DATED 25.11.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 THE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.ROC 9567/18/EST.B DATED 7.2.2023 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P4 THE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.ROC 7373/22/EST-1 DATED 16.2.2023 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 THE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 3.4.2023 Exhibit P6 THE COPY OF THE ROC NO.13290/22/EST.A DATED 3.5.2023 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

TRUE COPY

P.A TO JUDGE

LSN