The Court closed the writ petition challenging a temple employee's suspension, noting that reinstatement had already been ordered in a prior judgment, leaving disciplinary action open for the respondents.
Reinstatement previously ordered ; petition closed ; respondents permitted to initiate disciplinary proceedings if found necessary.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA
WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 23RD PHALGUNA, 1939
WP(C).No. 6157 of 2018
PETITIONER(S)
SURESH EMBRANTHIRI, KARANMA MELSANTHI (UNDER SUSPENSION), MACHHAD THIRUVANIKAVU TEMPLE, PANANGATTUKARA DEVASWOM, THEKKUMKARA, WADAKKANCHERY, THRISSUR-680589.
BY ADVS.SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. SRI.K.R.GANESH
RESPONDENT(S):
1. THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THRISSUR-680001. 2. THE SECRETARY, THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, THRISSUR-680001.
3. THE SPECIAL DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, THRISSUR-680001.
4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, THIRUVILWAMALA GROUP, THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, THRISSUR, PIN-680001.
5. THE DEVASWOM OFFICER, PANANGATTUKARA DEVASWOM, THEKKUMKARA, WADAKKANCHERY, THRISSUR-680589.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 6157 of 2018 (T)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
| EXHIBIT P1 |
TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27.1.1998 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER'S FATHER SRI.VENIKITAKRISHNAN EMBRANTHIRI TO THE RESPONDENT BOARD. |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P2 |
TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 4.5.1998 ISSUED TO PANANGATTUKARA DEVASWOM OFFICER. |
| EXHIBIT P2(A) | A LEGIBLE COPY OF EXT. P-2. |
| EXHIBIT P3 |
TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 16.9.1998 ISSUED BY THE DEVASWOM ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT BOARD. |
| EXHIBIT P4 |
TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 22.10.1998 ISSUED BY THE DEVASWOM ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, THIRUVILWAMALA, TO THE SPECIAL DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, THRISSUR. |
| EXHIBIT P5 |
TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 22.2.1999 OF THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD. |
| EXHIBIT P6 |
TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 9.2.1999 ISSUED BY THE OORALAN. |
| EXHIBIT P7 |
TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 9.2.1999 ISSUED BY THE OORALAN. |
| EXHIBIT P7 |
TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 1.12.1995 ISSUED BY THE THANTHRI OF THE TEMPLE. |
| EXHIBIT P7(A) | A LEGIBLE COPY OF EXT.P-7. |
| EXHIBIT P8 |
TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 19.9.2015 IN COMPLAINT NO.211/2015 OF THE HON'BLE OMBUDSMAN. |
| EXHIBIT P9 |
TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.11.2015 IN COMPLAINT NO.211/2015 OF THE HON'BLE OMBUDSMAN. |
| EXHIBIT P10 |
TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18.12.2015 OF THE HON'BLE OMBUDSMAN IN COMPLAINT NO.211/2015. |
| EXHIBIT P11 |
TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.M4.2049/09 DATED 18.1.2017 OF THE RESPONDENT BOARD. |
| EXHIBIT P12 |
TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE NO.M4.10483/2017 DATED 28.10.2017 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. |
| EXHIBIT P13 |
TRUE COPY OF HE REPLY DATED 16.11.2017 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER. |
WP(C).No. 6157 of 2018 (T)
EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE SUSPENSION ORDER NO. M4 10483/17 DATED 14.2.2018.
EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO DATED 21.2.2018 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL -----------------------
// True copy // Sd/PA to Judge
hmh
P.V.ASHA J.
W.P.(C).No. 6157 of 2018
Dated this the 14th day of March, 2018
JUDGMENT
The petitioner filed the writ petition challenging the suspension ordered as per Ext.P14. As per order dated 22.03.2018, this Court has already directed the respondent to reinstate the petitioner, in the light of the judgment in
Parameswaran Namboothiri V. Travancore Devaswom
Board [ 2012 (1) KLT 246] . It was made clear that the reinstatement shall be without prejudice to the right of the respondents to proceed with disciplinary action. The suspension was ordered on the ground that petitioner who is a Melsanthi received a sum of Rs.20/- as Dakshina. The issue is covered by the judgment in Parameswaran Namboothiri's case (supra).
In implementation of the interim order petitioner has already been re-instated. Therefore this writ petition is closed, leaving it open for the respondents to initiate disciplinary proceedings, if found necessary.
Sd/P.V.ASHA, JUDGE
hmh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the suspension order requires fresh adjudication given that the Court had already directed reinstatement in a prior judgment.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Parameswaran Namboothiri V. Travancore Devaswom BoardRelied on¶30
Parameswaran Namboothiri V. Travancore Devaswom Board [ 2012 (1) KLT 246]
SURESH EMBRANTHIRI
THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD
THE SPECIAL DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD
THE DEVASWOM OFFICER, PANANGATTUKARA DEVASWOM
P.V.ASHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
