Commissioner was directed to consider petitioners representations and pass appropriate orders within three months. Hearing opportunity for parties was ensured.
Directed second respondent to consider representations and pass appropriate orders within three months with hearing opportunity.
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 MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 26TH KARTHIKA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 35299 OF 2014
PETITIONER/S:
M.GIRIDHARAN
AGED54YEARS
S/O.RAMANNAIR,EXECUTIVEOFFICER,
NHANGATTIRIBHAGAVATHYDEVASWOM,P.O.NHANGATTIRI,
VIA.PATTAMBI,PALAKKADDISTRICT.
BYADVSRI.KALEESWARAMRAJ
RESPONDENT/S:
1STATEOFKERALA
REPRESENTEDBYSECRETARYTOGOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENTOFDEVASWOM,SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2COMMISSIONER
H.R.&C.E.,MALABARDEVASWOMBOARD,
HOUSINGFEDCOMPLEX,ERANHIPALAM,
KOZHIKODE-6.
BYADVS.
SMT.PRINCYXAVIER,SR.GP
SRI.R.LAKSHMINARAYAN,SC,MALABARDEVASWOMBOARD
SRI.PARTHASARATHY.B,SC,MALABARDEVASWOMBOARD
SRI.MAHESHV.RAMAKRISHNAN,SC,MALABARDEVASWOMBOARD
THISWRITPETITION(CIVIL)HAVINGCOMEUPFORADMISSIONON
17.11.2023,THECOURTONTHESAMEDAYDELIVEREDTHEFOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.35299 of 2014
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner states that at the time of filing the writ petition in the
year 2014, he was working as Executive Officer, IV Grade at the Nhangattiri Bhagavathy Devaswom, Pattambi, in Palakkad District. He states that by submitting Ext.P3 representation before the 2nd respondent, the petitioner requested that he be appointed as First Grade Executive Officer, extending the benefit of exemption from passing the departmental test on attaining the age of 50 years as on 22.5.2010. The grievance of the petitioner is that no action has been taken. It is on these assertions that this writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
i) To declare that the petitioner is entitled to get his probation in the post of Executive Officer Gr.IV declared as completed satisfactorily with effect from 22.5.2010 i.e the date on which he attained 50 years of age.
ii) To declare that the petitioner is entitled to be promoted to the post of Executive Officer Gr.I with effect from 22.05.2010 with retrospective effect;
iii) To issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to declare probation of the petitioner as completed satisfactorily with effect from 22.5.2010 in the cadre of Executive Officer, Gr.IV and to pass orders promoting him to the post of Executive Officer Gr.I with effect from the said date;
iv) To issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to
W.P.(C) No.35299 of 2014
3
consider and pass orders on Exts.P3, P4 and P8 submitted by the petitioner within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon’ble Court.
submits that the petitioner is entitled to the benefits of Rule 8(1) in the Rules
made under Section 100(2)(P) and (X)(ii) of the Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowment Act. The learned counsel would further submit that since the petitioner has retired from service, she requested that the 2nd respondent be
directed to take a decision on Exts.P3, P4, and P8 within a time frame.
2nd respondent to take up, consider and pass appropriate orders on Exts.P3, P4 and P8, as expeditiously, in any event, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Before making a decision, the petitioner and the Devaswom authority where the petitioner had been working
shall be given an opportunity to be heard.
The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition along with a copy of the judgment before the 2nd respondent to ensure compliance.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, JUDGE
NS/17/11/2023
W.P.(C) No.35299 of 2014
4
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 35299/2014
PETITIONEREXHIBITS
EXT.P1 |
TRUE COPY OF THE |
ORDER DATED 20.6.1978 |
|---|---|---|
EXT.P2 |
TRUE COPY OF THE BY THE 2ND RESPON |
ORDER DATED 3.10.1989 ISSUEDDENT |
EXT.P3 |
TRUE COPY OF THE 3.6.2010 SUBMITTETHE 2ND RESPONDEN |
REPRESENTATION DATEDD BY THE PETITIONER BEFORET |
EXT.P4 |
TRUE COPY OF THE SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT |
REMINDER DATED 19.7.2012PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND |
EXT.P5 |
TRUE COPY OF THE |
ORDER DATED 20.5.2009 |
EXT.P6 |
TRUE COPY OF THE BY THE ASSISTANT DEVASWOM BOARD. |
ORDER DATED 29.3.2012 ISSUEDCOMMISSIONER, MALABAR |
EXT.P7 |
TRUE COPY OF THE |
ORDER DATED 2.12.2009 |
EXT.P8 |
TRUE COPY OF THE 23.6.2014 |
REPRESENTATION DATED |
EXT.P9 |
TRUE COPY OF G.O(11.12.2012 |
RT) NO.7004/2012/RD DATED |
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to benefits under Rule 8(1) of Rules made under Section 100(2)(P) and (X)(ii) of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act.
Whether the respondent authorities should consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representations filed in 2010 and 2014.
Whether the petitioner's probation should be declared completed satisfactorily with effect from the date he attained 50 years of age.
M. Giridharan
State of Kerala
Commissioner H.R. & C.E. Malabar Devaswom Board
Raja Vijayaraghavan V
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court