Dismissed

M.Padmanabhan Namboothiri v. Malabar Devaswom Board

Kerala HC2 Nov 2012WP(C)/23422/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held no appeal lies under the Act, but directed the respondent to forward the pending appeal to the Commissioner. The order frames the subsequent proceeding as a valid revision petition under Section 18 to be disposed within four months.

What did the court decide?

The petition was not disposed on merits. The writ petition was disposed directing the second respondent to forward the pending appeal to the Commissioner to be treated as a valid revision petition und

M.Padmanabhan Namboothiri Vs Malabar Devaswom… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/11TH KARTHIKA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 23422 of 2012 (C)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

M.PADMANABHAN NAMBOOTHIRI, MARANGATTILLAM, VILAYAMCODE P.O. WORKING AS VAZHIPADU CLERK SREE THIRUVARKATTUKAVU BHAGAVATHI TEMPLE, MADAYI PAZHAYANGADY, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER

¶9

SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY ERANHIPPALAM, KOZHIKODE-673006.

¶12

2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, ERANHIPPALAM KOZHIKODE-673006.

¶13

3. EXECUTIVE OFFICER CHIRAKKAL KOVILAKAM DEVASWOMS, CHIRAKKAL P.O., KANNUR-670 011.

¶14

4. N.NARAYANAN MANAGER, THIRUVARKATTUKAVU BHAGAVATHI TEMPLE, MADAYI PAZHAYANGADY, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670304.

¶15

R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.N.MANOJ KUMAR, SC,MALABAR DEVASWOM

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-11-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

¶18

...2/-

¶19

WP(C).No. 23422 of 2012 (C)

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :

¶22

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29-5-1972 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER IN OA 8/71.

¶23

EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT.18-12-1981 IN OS 219/1978.

¶24

EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE SERVICE BOOK OF THE PETITIONER.

¶25

EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER AS GO(MS) 116/09/RD DATED 28-2-2009.

¶26

EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE PAY FIXATION ORDER OF THE PETITIONER.

¶27

EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12-1-2012 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶28

EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30-7-2012 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶29

EXHIBIT P8: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 27-8-2012 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶30

EXHIBIT P8a COPY OF THE AD CARD.

¶31

EXHIBIT P9: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT IN WPC 8678/2006.

¶32

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.

¶37

¶38

W.P. (C) No. 23422 of 2012

¶39

¶40

Dated, this the 2^nd day of November, 2012

¶41

JUDGMENT

¶42

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers :

¶43

i. To call for the records connected with the case leading to Ext. P5 and quash Ext. P5 to the extent it fixed the entry of the services of the petitioner as 16.07.1999 and Ext. P7 by issuing a writ of certiorari. ii. To direct the 3rd respondent to fix the date of entry of service of the petitioner as 01.11.1984 in the light of Ext. P3 service book of the petitioner and further direct the 3^rd respondent o give all the benefits to the petitioner reckoning his previous service with effect from 01.11.1984 in the light of Ext.P4 pay revision order and further direct the 3rd respondent to promote the petitioner as manager either in Thirvarkattukavu Bhagavathi temple or in any other temple under Chirakkal Kovilakam Devaswoms.

¶44

iii. Alternatively direct the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders of Ext. P8 expeditiously with notice to the petitioner and within a time frame fixed by this Honourable Court.

¶45

iv. To award cost for these proceedings.

¶46

v. To grant such other relief's that may be deemed just and proper by this Hon'ble Court.

¶47

W.P.(C) No. 23422 of 2012

¶48

: 2 :

¶49

When the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the grievance projected in the writ petition has already been brought up before the second respondent by preferring Ext. P8 appeal, which is pending consideration and that the petitioner will be satisfied, if a direction is given to the said respondent to have it considered and disposed of within a reasonable time.

¶50

Heard the learned standing counsel for the respondent Board as well, who submits that, no appeal under 57 of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act will lie against the impugned order, that the idea and understanding of the petitioner in this regard is quite wrong and misconceived and that the remedy of the petitioner, if aggrieved, is to file a revision petition under Section 18 of the Act before the Commissioner for Malabar Devaswom.

¶51

After hearing both the sides and considering the limited nature of relief sought for by the petitioner and proposed to be given, this Court does not find it necessary to issue any notice to the respondents 3 and 4 for the time

¶52

W.P.(C) No. 23422 of 2012

¶53

: 3 :

¶54

being.

¶55

The Writ Petition is disposed directing the second respondent to forward Ext. P8 appeal preferred by the petitioner to the Commissioner for Malabar Devaswom Board forthwith, at any rate, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, on which event, the same shall be treated as a valid revision petition under Section 18 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and also to the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents. This exercise shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four months from the date receipt of the proceedings as above.

¶56

Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ petition before the first and second respondents forthwith for further steps.

¶57

sd/-

¶58

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE)

¶59

kmd

¶60

/True copy/

¶61

P.A. to Judge

M.Padmanabhan Namboothiri v. Malabar Devaswom Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Padmanabhan Namboothiri v. Malabar Devaswom Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C.a.Vincent Vs Rajeev Sadanandan

Resmi.v. Vs the Kerala State Sports Council

M.Abdul Jabbar Vs the State of Kerala and Others

The Manager Vs the Government of Kerala

The Manager, Vocational Higher Secondary School Vs the State of Kerala

Sheema.S Vs Edcavanakkad Grama Panchayat