Disposed

M.N. Sreenivasan Namboodiri v. the Travancore Devaswom Board

Kerala HC7 Nov 2012WP(C)/10086/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought quashing of a transfer order and directed consideration for transfer to minor Devaswom temples. The Court directed the Third Respondent to consider the petitioner's explanation and finalize the pending disciplinary appeal within specific timelines. No constitutional candidates could result collisions about the legality. Transfer norms were not adjudicated directly on meri

What did the court decide?

Directed the 3rd respondent to consider Ex.P13 and pass orders within one month; to finalize the pending appeal within three months.

M.N. Sreenivasan Namboodiri Vs the Travancore Devaswom… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/16TH KARTHIKA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 10086 of 2012 (I)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

M.N. SREENIVASAN NAMBOODIRI, S/O. NARAYANAN ELAYATH, AGED 44 YEARS, SANTHI, CHERUVALLY DEVI TEMPLE, MUNDAKKAYAM GROUP, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, KOTTAYAM-686 519.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.N.UNNIKRISHNAN.

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004,

¶11

REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY.

¶12

2. THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER,

¶13

TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD,

¶14

NANATHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004.

¶15

3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,

¶16

TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, MUNDAKKAYAM GROUP, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 513.

¶17

4. THE SUB GROUP OFFICER,

¶18

PEERUMEDU DEVASWOM, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, PEERUMEEDU P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 531.

¶19

5. THE SUB GROUP OFFICER,

¶20

CHERUVALLY DEVASWOM, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, KAVUMBHAGAM-686 519, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

¶21

BY ADV. SRI.G.BIJU, SC, TDB.

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07-11-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

rs.

¶24

WP(C).No. 10086 of 2012 (I)

¶25

APPENDIX

¶26

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

¶27

EXHIBIT P1: A TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 26.02.2012 OF THE ASST. DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER.

¶28

EXHIBIT P2: A TRUE COPY OF MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DATED 26.02.2012.

¶29

EXHIBIT P3: A TRUE COPY OF COVERING LETTER DATED 26.02.2012.

¶30

EXHIBIT P4: A TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO. 192 DATED 26.02.2012.

¶31

EXHIBIT P5: A TRUE COPY OF COVERING LETTER 12.03.2012.

¶32

EXHIBIT P6: A TRUE COPY OF LEAVE APPLICATION DATED 12.03.2012.

¶33

EXHIBIT P7: A TRUE COPY OF MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DATED 12.03.2012.

¶34

EXHIBIT P8: A TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 10.03.2012 BY THE PETITIONER TO THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER.

¶35

EXHIBIT P9: A TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 25.03.2012.

¶36

EXHIBIT P10: A TRUE COPY OF CHARGE MEMO ROC NO.21678/11/S/EST./B DATED 17.3.2012 WITH STATEMENT OF ALLEGATION.

¶37

EXHIBIT P11: A TRUE COPY OF WRITTEN STATEMENT DATED 29.03.2012 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT NO.2.

¶38

EXHIBIT P12: A TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.599 DATED 27.03.2012 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

¶39

EXHIBIT P13: A TRUE COPY OF EXPLANATION DATED 03.04.2012.

¶40

EXHIBIT P14: COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 24/05/2010.

¶41

EXHIBIT P15: COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 18/12/2011 SUBMITTED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶42

EXHIBIT P16: COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 26/02/2012 WITH POSTAL RECEIPT NO.EL.329865514.

¶43

EXHIBIT P17: COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 03/04/2012.

¶44

(P.T.O.)

¶45

WP(C).No. 10086 of 2012 (I)

¶46

EXHIBIT P18: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12/03/2012 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

¶47

EXHIBIT P19: COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT.

¶48

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:-

¶49

EXT.R1A	COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 14/12/2011 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXT.R1B	COPY OF THE EXHIBIT R1A.
EXT.R1C	COPY OF THE REPORT RECORDED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN THE INSPECTION REGISTER.
EXT.R1D	COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 25/02/2012 TO THE ASST. DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER.
EXT.R1E	COPY OF THE RELIEVING ORDER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXT.R1F	COPY OF THE TRANSFER NORMS OF TEMPLE EMPLOYEES IN TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD (CIRCULAR) NO. ROC. NO.138/05/SANTHI DATED 10/02/2005 ISSUED BY THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

rs.

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶54

W.P.(C). No. 10086 of 2012

¶55

Dated this the 7^th day of November, 2012

¶56

JUDGMENT

¶57

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following

¶58

prayers:

¶59

i. call for the records leading to denial of transfer from Cheruvally to Peruvanthanam Devaswom, Mundakkayam Parthasarathi Temple and Sivan Kovil, Kanjirapally and to Exts. P4 and P12;

¶60

ii. Declare that transfer for petitioner as evidenced in Exts. P4 and P12 are bad in law;

¶61

iii. Declare that respondent is bound to consider the request of the petitioner for transfer to any minor temples, even under the same Group as requested in Ext.P9.

¶62

iv. Issue a writ of certiorari or appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Ext.P4 and transfer thereon and Ext.P12;

¶63

v. issue a writ of mandamus or appropriate writ or order or direction to consider and pass necessary orders on the request for transfer to minor temples made in Ext.P9 within a reasonable time;”

¶64

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that,

¶65

there is no mention of any specific instance of misconduct in the report submitted by the 3^rd respondent to the Commissioner,

¶66

W.P.C. No. 10086 of 2012 -2-

¶67

despite which adverse order came to be passed; which however is the subject matter of appeal before the Commissioner by way of Ext.P14. The prayer is only to cause Ext.P13 to be considered by 3^rd respondent, so as to give a convenient posting to the petitioner, to any of the minor temples under the Mundakkayam Group.

¶68

Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Board as

¶69

well.

¶70

After hearing, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the 3^rd respondent to consider Ext.P13 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, with regard to the claim for a posting as above at the earliest, at any rate with 'one month' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Ext.P14 appeal which is stated as pending before the 2^nd respondent in respect of the disciplinary proceedings also shall be finalized in accordance with law at the earliest, at any rate, within 'thee months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶71

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.

¶72

Kp/-

M.N. Sreenivasan Namboodiri v. the Travancore Devaswom Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.N. Sreenivasan Namboodiri v. the Travancore Devaswom Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T.Jawahar and Another Vs Sri.N.Natarajan and Another

P.J.Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Rahimath.K.a. Vs Registrar

Aneesh Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Priya.S. Vs K.S.E.B

B.B.Subha Vs the State of Kerala