High Court of KeralaWP(C)/1081/2014dismissed as withdrawn

T.G.Sajeev v. Malabar Devaswom Board

2015-02-23Honourable Mr. Justice Anil K.Narendran,Honourable Mr.Justice P.N.Ravindran3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN MONDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/4TH PHALGUNA, 1936 WP(C).No. 1081 of 2014 (I) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER:

------------------------------------------------ T.G.SAJEEV, THACHAMPULLY HOUSE, FIELD NAGAR, KOLAZHY P.O., THRISSUR - 680 010.

BY ADV. SRI.R.K.MURALEEDHARAN RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:

----------------------------------------------------

1. MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER, KOZHIKODE - 673 001.

2. SREE KADAMPUZHA BHAGAVATHI DEVASWOM, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KADAMPUZHA P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - PIN 676 553.

3. EXECUTIVE OFFICER SREE KADAMPUZHA BHAGAVATHI DEVASWOM P.O KADAMPUZHA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT PIN 676 553. R1 BY ADV. SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON, SC, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD R2-R3 BY ADVS. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: vpv

P.N.RAVINDRAN & ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JJ.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P.(C) No.1081 of 2014 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2015

JUDGMENT

P.N.Ravindran, J.

The work of reconstructing the Chuttambalam and the work of flooring the Thirumuttam of Sree Kadampuzha Bhagavathy Temple was awarded to the petitioner by the Executive Officer, Sree Kadampuzha Bhagavathy Devaswom. Later, the work was terminated at his risk and costs by Ext.P15 notice dated 4.1.2014 issued on the instructions of the Executive Officer by his lawyer. The instant writ petition was thereupon filed challenging Ext.P15 termination notice and seeking various reliefs.

2. When this writ petition came up for hearing today, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that reserving liberty with the petitioner to institute a suit in the court of competent jurisdiction seeking redressal of his grievances, the writ petition may be dismissed as withdrawn. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents did not oppose the said submission. In such circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, reserving liberty with the petitioner to move the

W.P.(C) No.1081 of 2014 competent civil court seeking redressal of his grievances. The contentions of both sides on the merits are kept open. Sd/- P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE Sd/- ANIL K.NARENDRAN JUDGE vpv