Ajayakumar E.K. Vs Cochin Devaswom Board

1

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

2025:KER:26774

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶7

¶8

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALEE KRISHNA S.

¶9

WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 14TH PHALGUNA, 1946

¶10

WP(C) NO. 25371 OF 2015

¶11

PETITIONER:

¶12

AJAYAKUMAR E.K.

¶13

DEVASWOM OFFICER, SREE POORNATHRAYEESA TEMPLE, TRIPUNITHURA, RESIDING AT KRISHNAKRIPA, CHOTTANIKKARA P.O., ERNAKULAM - 682 312.

¶14

BY ADVS.
SMT.K.R.KRISHNAKUMARI
SMT.P.V.RADHAMANI

¶15

RESPONDENTS:

¶16

1 COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, DEVASWOM BUILDING, THRISSUR - 680 001.

¶17

2 THE SPECIAL DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER OFFICE OF THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, DEVASWOM BUILDING, THRISSUR - 680 001.

¶18

3 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (VALUABLES) OFFICE OF THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, DEVASWOM BUILDING, THRISSUR - 680 001.

¶19

4 THE DEVASWOM ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TRIPUNITHURA GROUP, THRIPUNITHURA- 682 301.

¶20

5 ADDL.R5 SMT.KOMALAM, HARICHANDANAM HOUSE, SANSKRIT COLLEGE ROAD, TRIPUNITHURA-682 301.

¶21

2

¶22

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶23

2025:KER:26774

¶24

6 ADDL.R6 SRI.VASUDEVAN MOOTHATHU, ILAYIDATH ILLOM, KOTTAKKAKOM, TRIPUNITHURA-682 301.

¶25

7 ADDL.R7 SRI.M.MOHANAN MENOKKI [EXPIRED] MEPPARAMBATH HOUSE, PUNITHURA P.O., TRIPUNITHURA-682 301. [ADDL.R5 TO R7 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 28/03/2023 IN I.A-1/2022 IN WP(C) 25371/2015]

¶26

8 ADDL.R8 SRI.SIVASANKARAN MENOKKI, MEPARAMBATH HOUSE, PUNITHURA.P.O., TRIPUNITHURA-682301 [ADDL.R8 IS THE LEGAL HEIR OF THE DECEASED 7TH RESPONDENT AS PER ORDER DATED 28/03/2023 IN I.A-1/2023 IN WP(C) 25371/2015]

¶27

BY ADVS.
SRI.KRISHNA MENON, SC, COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD
L.RAJESH NARAYAN
SRI.G.RAJAGOPAL, SC, COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD
K.P.SUDHEER

¶28

OTHER PRESENT:

¶29

SRI. K. P. SUDHEER, SC, CDB

¶30

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶31

3

¶32

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶33

2025:KER:26774

¶34

JUDGMENT

¶35

Muralee Krishna, J.

¶36

The petitioner who is the Devaswom Officer of Tripunithura Devaswom under the management of the 1^st respondent Cochin Devaswom Board filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:

¶37

“a) To issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Exts.P7, P8 and P14 to the extent of fixing the liability of one fourth of Rs.28,650/- for the loss of articles which have not yet been handed over to the petitioner as unsustainable and in violation of the petitioner's fundamental rights under Articles 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India since those items were lost prior to 27.06.2006, i.e., the date of taking over charge by the petitioner as the Devaswom Officer, Tripunithura Group;

¶38

b) To issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Clause (7) of Ext.P7 to the extent of fixing the liability for the loss of articles which have not yet been handed over to the petitioner as unsustainable since those items were lost prior to the date of taking over charge by the petitioner as the Devaswom Officer, Tripunithura Group;

¶39

c) To declare that the petitioner is not liable to discharge the liability of one fourth of Rs.28,650/- for the loss of articles which have not yet been handed over to the petitioner as unsustainable and in violation of the petitioner's fundamental

¶40

4

¶41

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶42

2025:KER:26774

¶43

rights under Articles 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India since those items were lost prior to the date of taking over charge by the petitioner as the Devaswom Officer, Tripunithura Group;

¶44

d) To issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Ext.P6 to the extent of fixing the liability of Rs.33,884.85 for the loss of articles which have not yet been handed over to the petitioner and which were lost long prior to the date of taking over charge by the petitioner as the Devaswom Officer, Tripunithura Group as unsustainable and in violation of the petitioner's fundamental rights under Articles 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India.

¶45

e) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents 1 to 3 to refund an amount of Rs.33,884.85 which was alleged as liability and compelled to be deposited by the petitioner as per Ext.P5 series receipts;

¶46

f) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents 1 to 3 to prepare and maintain the Pandam Pathram Register and Major Eradavu Register in Sree Poornathrayeesa Temple, Tripunithura, after rectifying the anomalies in those Registers, in compliance with the direction of the 1^st respondent in Ext.P2 order;

¶47

g) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents 1 to 3 to prepare and maintain Thanathu Register in Sree Poornathrayeesa Temple, Tripunithura.

¶48

5

¶49

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶50

2025:KER:26774

¶51

h) To declare that the petitioner is not liable to discharge any liability in respect of the loss of any movable and immovable properties under the Tripunithura Devaswom Group due to the anomalies in the Pandam Pathram Register and Major Eradavu Register in Sree Poornathrayeesa Temple, Tripunithura and due to the absence of Thanathu Register in the Tripunithura Devaswom Group, the charge of which have not yet been handed over to the petitioner”.

¶52

The petitioner entered service as Devaswom

¶53

Assistant/LDC under the 1^st respondent Cochin Devaswom Board in Chottanikkara Devaswom on 06.11.1996. He was promoted and posted in the grade of Devaswom Officer at Chottanikkara Devaswom on 01.04.2002. He took charge as Devaswom Officer in Tripunithura Devaswom on 28.06.2006. Sree Poornathrayeesa

¶54

Temple is the only temple under Tripunithura Devaswom. Immediately on taking charge, the petitioner noted several anomalies in the Pandam Pathram Register (‘P.P. Register’ in short) and Major Eradavu Register (‘M.E. Register’ in short) kept in the temple and by way of Ext.P1 letter dated 31.07.2006 he informed these anomalies to the 4^th respondent Devaswom Assistant Commissioner. According to the petitioner, there are three P.P. Registers in Tripunithura Devaswom. They are (i) P.P.

¶55

6

¶56

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶57

2025:KER:26774 Register in the custody of the Assistant Commissioner, Tripunithura Devaswom in which the articles referred to therein are in the joint custody of Assistant Commissioner, Devaswom Officer, Moothathu and Menokki in the temple, (ii) P.P. Register in the custody of Devaswom Officer; and (iiii) P.P. Register in the custody of Mel Santhi. As per Ext.P2 proceedings dated 28.09.2006, the 1^st respondent authorized the Pandam Pathram Special Officer who is at present re-designated as Assistant Commissioner (Valuables) (3^rd respondent) to conduct an inspection on the anomalies reported in Ext.P1. But no inspection was conducted by the 3^rd respondent till date.

¶58

2.1. While so, the Test Audit of Receipt Accounts of Tripunithra Devaswom for the year 2005-2006 was conducted from the office of Deputy Director of Local Fund Audit, Cochin Devaswom Board, Thrissur, with effect from 23.05.2007. As per Ext.P3 audit notes of the Test Audit it was found that the charge of the items in P.P. Registers and M.E. Register were not handed over to the petitioner by his predecessors and there are anomalies

¶59

in those Registers. By Ext.P4 letter dated 18.01.2008, the petitioner requested the 2^nd respondent Special Devaswom

¶60

7

¶61

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶62

2025:KER:26774 Commissioner to issue orders for repairing the gold Kolam and gold Golaka which are being used for the temple festivals in the months of Vrischikam and Kumbam. The said letter was annexed with Ext.P4(a) letter dated 15.01.2008 of the Thanthri of the temple. Pursuant to Ext.P4 and P4(a), the 3^rd respondent inspected the gold Kolam and Golaka and also other items in the P.P. Register and found that certain items lost weight and some items are missing. This Court interfered in the above issue and ordered to repair the gold Kolam and gold Golaka based on the report of the observer appointed by this court.

¶63

2.2. In the year 2010, the then Pandam Patram Special Officer inspected the articles mentioned in the P.P. Registers and found certain articles missing. As orally directed by the 3^rd respondent, in order to rectify the P.P. Register and M.E Register which are in the custody of the Devaswom Officer, the petitioner deposited some amounts and was issued with Ext.P5(a) to P5(e) receipts for a total sum of Rs.33,884.85/-.

¶64

2.3. Thereafter the 2^nd respondent issued Ext.P6 order dated 19.05.2010 regarding the inspection of P.P. Register in the Devaswom and exonerated the petitioner from the liability of

¶65

8

¶66

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶67

2025:KER:26774 missing articles after recording the payments effected by the petitioner by Ext.P5 series. But on 19.05.2010 the 2^nd respondent issued Ext.P7 order also fixing the liability of missing articles referred to in the P.P Register which is in the joint custody of Assistant Commissioner, Devaswom Officer, Moothathu and Menokki. In that order, the 2^nd respondent found that the Devaswom Officer is solely responsible for the missing articles in the M.E. Register. On 19.05.2010 itself the 2^nd respondent issued Ext.P8 notice fixing the liability of missing articles assessed as per Ext.P7 to all the four joint custodians including the petitioner. On

¶68

receipt of Exts.P7 and P8, the petitioner submitted Ext.P9 explanation dated 03.06.2010 producing therewith Ext.P9(a) photocopies of relevant pages of P.P Register. From the said document, it is evident that the key of the Kallara Bhandaram which is in the joint custody of the aforesaid four persons was handed over to the then Devaswom Officer only on 31.10.2002 and thereafter the key was not handed over to the successor.

¶69

2.4. On 07.04.2011 this Court passed Ext.P10 order dated 07.04.2011 in I.A. No. 716 of 2011 in an unnumbered R.P. of 2011 in DBA No. 11 of 2011 directing that the petitioner and the

¶70

9

¶71

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶72

2025:KER:26774 Assistant Engineer shall not be entrusted with any other official duties or shall not be transferred until the renovation work of the Sreekovil of Sree Poornathrayeesa temple is completed. By Ext.P11 order dated 27.04.2011, the 2^nd respondent directed the petitioner to participate in the discussion in respect of rewriting of the P.P. Register in the temple to be held in the chamber of the 2^nd respondent on 03.05.2011. After discussion on that date, the 2^nd respondent passed Ext.P12 order, but no decision has been taken on the rewriting of the P.P. Register. Though the petitioner sent several reminders to the respondents, no action has been taken to implement Ext.P2 order and to rewrite the Registers in the temple.

¶73

2.5. On 11.11.2013 the petitioner submitted Ext.P13 representation before the President and Members of the 1^st respondent, requesting to take steps to rectify the existing anomalies and rewrite all the Registers. But without considering the explanations of the petitioner as well as the other joint custodians and without hearing the affected parties including the petitioner, the 2^nd respondent passed Ext.P14 order dated 26.12.2014 fixing the liability of Rs.28,650/- to the four joint

¶74

10

¶75

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶76

2025:KER:26774 custodians and directing them, including the petitioner, to remit one-fourth of that amount. On receipt of Ext.P14, the petitioner submitted Ext.P15 representation to the 2^nd respondent. Thereafter the petitioner approached this Court with the above writ petition.

¶77

On 19.08.2015 when this writ petition came up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel for Cochin Devaswom Board took notice for the respondents. This Court granted an interim order staying all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P14 for effecting the recovery of one-fourth of Rs.28,650/- from the petitioner for the loss of the articles, on condition that the petitioner provides fixed deposit receipt for Rs.28,650/- drawn on his name in a Nationalised Bank of his choice and lien marked in favour of Cochin Devaswom Board within a period of two months, before the Registrar General of this Court.

¶78

On 15.10.2015 as per the order in I.A. No.12599 of 2015,

¶79

the interim order imposing a condition to provide a fixed deposit receipt for Rs.28,650/- by the petitioner was modified to the effect

¶80

that the petitioner has to produce a fixed deposit receipt for Rs.7200/- within a period of three weeks. In pursuance to the said

¶81

11

¶82

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶83

2025:KER:26774 direction, the petitioner produced the fixed deposit receipt along with a memo and it was kept in the safe custody of the Registrar General as item No.946 which was renewed from time to time.

¶84

By I.A. No.1 of 2022, the petitioner sought impleading of additional respondents 5 to 7. When notice was issued to the proposed additional respondents it was reported that the notice issued to the 7^th respondent was returned with an endorsement 'deceased’. Thereafter the petitioner filed I.A. No.1 of 2023 seeking to implead additional 8^th respondent stating that he is competent to represent the estate of the proposed additional 7^th respondent who is no more. As per the order dated 28.03.2023 in I.A. No.1 of 2023, additional respondents 5 to 8 were impleaded in the writ petition. It was ordered that whether or not all the legal heirs of the deceased 7^th respondent need to be impleaded is a matter to be decided at subsequent stages of the proceedings.

¶85

By I.A. No.7629 of 2017 dated 19.05.2017, the petitioner produced Exts. P17 to P19 documents.

¶86

The 1^st respondent Cochin Devaswom Board filed a counter affidavit dated 11.02.2025 opposing the averments in the writ petition. Paragraphs 3 and 4 of that counter affidavit read

¶87

12

¶88

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶89

2025:KER:26774

¶90

thus:

¶91

“3. Chapter 4 of the Devaswom Manual deals with the registers to be maintained by the 1^st respondent. Clause 16 deals with Major Eradavu Register. In this regard true copy of the relevant pages of Chapter 4 of the Devaswom Manual is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R1 (a). According to the petitioner, when he assumed charge as the Devaswom Officer of Thripunithura devaswom he realised that the registers kept in the temple had not been properly maintained and several anomalies were existing in the registers. It was in that circumstances the petitioner submitted Exhibit P1 letter dated 31.07.2006. The contention of the petitioner that no inspection was conducted by the 3^rd respondent regarding the anomalies alleged in respect of the registers maintained in the office of Sree Poornathrayeesha Temple is incorrect. During the pendency of the above writ petition, the Honourable Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) No. 7947/2018 appointed the then Registrar General of this Honourable Court to prepare an inventory of the valuables in the temple and a detailed report and inventory was also submitted before the Honourable Supreme Court.

¶92

According to the petitioner, the predecessor of the petitioner has not handed over the items mentioned in the registers maintained in the temple in question. The petitioner concedes that by Exts. P5(a) to P5 (e) receipts an amount of 33,884.85/- was remitted by him. The contention of the petitioner that by Ext.P6 order dated 19.05.2010 he

¶93

13

¶94

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶95

2025:KER:26774

¶96

was exonerated from the liability of missing articles is incorrect. Exhibit P6 would show that in view of the remittances effected by Exhibits P5 (a) to (e), the 2^nd respondent passed Exhibit P6 order. Exhibit P7 order was issued in respect of the missing articles which was in the joint custody of the Assistant Commissioner, Moothath, Menokki and the petitioner (Devaswom Officer). The Devaswom Officer cannot shirk his responsibility in respect of the articles included in the Major Eradavu register. Ext.P8 notice dated 19.05.2010 was issued to the petitioner and other persons responsible for the missing of articles. It is also alleged that no personal hearing was afforded to the petitioner before issuing Ext.P14 order dated 26/12/2014. Ext.P15 is the representation submitted by the petitioner on receipt of Ext.P14 order. The contention of the petitioner that the amount deposited in terms of Ext.P5 (a) to (e) receipts are liable to be refunded is unsustainable. It is submitted that there is absolutely no illegality or arbitrariness in issuing Exts. P7, P8 and P14 orders. The said orders were issued after considering the explanations offered by the petitioner. So, the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief and the writ petition may be dismissed with costs.”

¶97

To the counter affidavit filed by the 1^st respondent, the petitioner filed a reply affidavit producing therewith Exts. P20 to

¶98

P28 documents.

¶99

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

¶100

14

¶101

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶102

2025:KER:26774 learned Standing Counsel for Cochin Devaswom Board and its officials.

¶103

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the charge of the items in P.P Register and M.E. Register were not handed over to the petitioner at the time of his taking charge as a Devaswom Officer in the Tripunithura Devaswom on 28.06.2006 which was mentioned by him in Ext.P1 letter filed before the Devaswom Assistant Commissioner at the earliest point of time, after taking the charge. In fact, after 31.10.2002, nobody verified the Registers as evident from Ext.P9(a) the relevant pages of the P.P. Register dated 31.10.2002. The learned counsel brought the attention of this Court to Ext.P16 the relevant pages of M.E. Register wherein some items were entered as not entrusted and argued that the petitioner who was not entrusted with the properties entered in the P.P. Register and M.E. Register cannot be held liable for the missing of the items which occurred prior to his taking over the charge.

¶104

On the other hand the learned Standing Counsel for the Cochin Devaswom Board submitted that the missing of items were found out at the time of audit of the accounts of the Tripunithura

¶105

15

¶106

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶107

2025:KER:26774 Devaswom for the year 2005-06. The reduction in the weight or missing of some items including gold and silver were mentioned in Ext.P3 report. If the items were not handed over to the petitioner, he could have refused to take charge of the Registers concerned.

¶108

The petitioner is the Devaswom Officer of Tripunithura Devaswom under the Tripunithura Group with effect from 28.06.2006. According to the petitioner at the time of his taking charge as the Devaswom Officer, he noted anomalies in the P.P. Register and M.E. Register kept in the Sree Poornathrayeesha Temple. He brought the missing items to the notice of the 4^th respondent by Ext.P1 letter dated 31.07.2006. Though, by Ext.P2 proceedings dated 28.09.2006, the 1^st respondent directed the 3^rd respondent to conduct an inspection of the P.P. Register and M.E. Register in the Tripunitura Devaswom and to submit a report before the 1^st respondent, the same has not been complied till date. It is also the case of the petitioner that in the year 2010, as directed by the 3^rd respondent, he deposited a sum of Rs.33,884.85/- in order to rectify the anomalies in the P.P. Register and M.E. Register. However, the 2^nd respondent issued Ext.P7

¶109

16

¶110

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶111

2025:KER:26774 order dated 19.05.2010 fixing the liability of missing articles referred to the P.P Register in the joint custody of the Assistant Commissioner, the petitioner, Moothathu and Menokki. Though the petitioner submitted Ext.P13 representation dated 11.11.2013 before the 1^st respondent to rectify the anomalies, Ext.P14 order dated 26.12.2014 was issued by the 2^nd respondent fixing the liability of Rs.28,650/- to the four custodians of the Registers concerned. According to the petitioner he was not heard before passing such an order by the 2^nd respondent. But, according to the respondents, the petitioner cannot escape from the liability of the missing articles which was statutorily in his custody after taking charge as a Devawom Officer.

¶112

During the course of arguments, the learned Standing Counsel for the Cochin Devaswom Board invited our attention to Articles 137 and 138 of Chapter X of the Devaswom manual which stipulates the manner in which the Nadavaravu articles have to be dealt with. Chapter X of the Devaswom manual deals with other items of Devaswom receipts. Articles 137 and 138 deal with Nadavaravu . They read thus:

¶113

“137. Nadavaravu -In almost all the temples articles such as

¶114

17

¶115

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶116

2025:KER:26774

¶117

gold and silver ornaments, bell-metal articles such as lamps, etc., perishable articles including bulls, cows, calves, goats and other live-stock are offered as vazhivadus, which are credited in the Nadavaravu register in Form No. XXV Appendix XIV to be maintained in each Devaswam. In some cases, the donors express a wish that the articles offered by them may be preserved for the daily use in the temple without their being sold in auction. In such cases, they are preserved, if unobjectionable, for the use of the temple according to the wishes of the donors and are taken to the register of ornaments and vessels (vide article 320) maintained in each Devaswam in Form No. XXVI Appendix XIV. The other articles as are not required for the temple use, are disposed of in auction and the sale proceeds credited to the Devaswam. Such of the articles of Nadavaravu as can be used for nithyanidanam expenditure may be utilised for such purposes and the cost credited by adjustment. The disposal of these articles shall be as follows:-

¶118

Sale of Nadavaravu articles .-Nadavaravu articles belonging to Devaswams may be classified under two headsMajor and Minor.

¶119

All the articles of gold, silver, bell-metal and precious stones may be classed as Major and all the other articles as Minor. Explanation, -Ornaments and vessels made of copper, brass, iron and other articles and all kinds of furniture and other articles made of wood and perishables are to be included in the latter class. 'Perishables' means articles which are subject to damage or decay, e. g., all sorts of fruits and other

¶120

18

¶121

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶122

2025:KER:26774 vegetable stuff, silk, cloth, sugar and molasses and also include bulls, cows, calves, goats and other live-stock; but do not include elephants.

¶123

1. MAJOR ARTICLES

¶124

List of all articles of gold, silver, bell-metal and precious stones received in a year to be disposed of should be submitted to the Diwan not later than the 1^st of Thulam of the succeeding year for sanction. When sanction is received the Devaswam Commissioner should arrange to collect the articles to be sold in different centres according to the importance of the locality for the sale of articles and notify in the Cochin Government Gazette a month at least in advance of the dates and places of the sale and also the conditions of the sale. The sales should be conducted by the Devaswam Commissioner on the dates fixed in the notification and the facts reported to the Diwan with the sale lists for confirmation. When the sales are confirmed by the Diwan, the articles should be weighed and handed over to the bidders and the sale proceeds realised and remitted into the Treasury then and there. Particulars of remittance into the Treasury should also be reported to the Diwan. Such of the articles of Nadavaravu which should at the donor's request be preserved may be ordered by the Commissioner to be preserved in the Devaswams and these articles should be entered as such in the Registers of ornaments and vessels (Article 320) maintained in the Department.

¶125

19

¶126

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶127

2025:KER:26774

¶128

2. MINOR ARTICLES.

¶129

Ornaments, vessels, etc., of copper, wood and other materials not classified under major articles received as Nadavaravu in a year in the several Devaswams should be duly listed by the Assistant Commissioner or the Deputy Tahsildar of Cranganur, as the case may be, and the lists together with separate lists of other useless and unserviceable articles belonging to each Group to be sold should be submitted to the Devaswam Commissioner for sanctioning the same, not later than the 1^st of Thulam of the succeeding year. After the receipt of the sanction of the Commissioner the articles as per the list may be sold in public auction by the Assistant Commissioners or the Deputy Tahsildar of Cranganur, as the case may be, and the results reported to the Commissioner with the sale-lists for confirmation. After the sales are confirmed the articles should be handed over to the bidders and the sale amount realised and remitted into the Treasury and the fact reported to the Commissioner.

¶130

All-perishable articles including bulls, cows, calves, goats and other live-stock will be disposed of then and there in public auction by the local Devaswom officers to the best advantage and the sale proceeds realised by them and credited to the accounts and the sale list submitted to the Commissioner for confirmation through the immediate supervising officers. After the sales are confirmed the Assistant Commissioner or the Deputy Tahsildar, as the case may be, should verify the remittance of the amounts into

¶131

20

¶132

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶133

2025:KER:26774

¶134

the Treasury.

¶135

Note ,-A ledger of all articles received should be maintained in Form No I Appendix X and the monthly totals and progressive totals struck signed by the officers. This will be the basis for transfer of charge which should be recorded then and there. Disposal should be noted in this in detail and checked and attested by the Assistant Commissioner and the balance struck”.

¶136

As per the Devaswom manual, the Register of

¶137

Ornaments and vessels to be preserved have to be maintained in form No. XXVI-Appendix XIV. Similarly, the Nadavaravu items have to be entered in Form No.1-Appendix X. According to the Devaswom Board, there is flow in the management of the Nadavaravu articles and hence some of them were found missing in the registers concerned and the persons who are the custodians of these registers including the petitioner are liable for the missing articles. While going through Exts. P7 and P14 orders of the 2^nd respondent we notice that those orders were passed without giving an opportunity to the petitioner to put forward his contentions before the 2^nd respondent. During the course of arguments, the learned Standing Counsel for the Cochin Devaswom Board invited our attention to the judgment dated

¶138

21

¶139

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶140

2025:KER:26774 20.06.2014 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 2978 of 2013 which is a writ petition filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Tripunithura Group who is one among the four persons who were found responsible for the missing of valuables, complaining about non-disbursal of DCRG, wherein this Court directed the 1^st respondent to release the DCRG to the petitioner therein retaining a sum of Rs.7163/- deposited by her. In that judgment, this court held that if in a detailed enquiry, it was ultimately found that the petitioner therein was not at all responsible for the loss, then she is entitled to claim the amount retained by the Board. It was further directed that the enquiry shall be completed within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

¶141

Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and submissions made at the Bar, we are of the view that Ext.P14 order of the 2^nd respondent finding the petitioner and other three custodians of the valuables as responsible for the missing items worth Rs.28,650/- is liable to be set aside, since the said order was passed without hearing the petitioner and others.

¶142

In such circumstances, we dispose of this writ petition by setting aside Ext.P14 order dated 26.12.2014 passed by the 2^nd

¶143

22

¶144

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶145

2025:KER:26774 respondent and direct the 2^nd respondent to decide the matter afresh after giving an opportunity to the petitioner and other affected parties to put forward their contentions on merit, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that the petitioner can submit fresh representation before the 2^nd respondent explaining his defence. The deposit made by the petitioner in pursuance to the direction of this Court shall be subject to the decision that would be taken by the 2^nd respondent.

¶146

Sd/- ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE Sd/-

¶147

MURALEE KRISHNA S., JUDGE

¶148

sks

¶149

23

¶150

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶151

2025:KER:26774

¶152

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25371/2015

¶153

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶154

`Renewed Fixed` `Deposit Receipt`	`Renewed Fixed Deposit Receipt`
`Renewed FD Receipt`	`Renewal of FD Receipt deposited with` `Registrar General`
`RESPONDENT EXHIBITS`
`EXHIBIT R 1 ( a )`	`True copy of the relevant pages of Chapter` `4 of the Devaswom Manual`
`PETITIONER EXHIBITS`
`Exhibit-P20`	`True copy of the relevant pages of Chapter` `4 of the Devaswom Manual issued by the 1st` `respondent in the year 2014`
`Exhibit-P21`	`True copy of the Judgment of this Hon’ble` `Court dated 27.11.2017 in` `WP(C)No.35340/2014`
`Exhibit-P22`	`True copy of the Order of the Hon’ble` `Supreme Court dated 10.09.2018 in` `SLP(C)No.7947/2018`
`Exhibit-P23`	`True copy of the Order of the Hon’ble` `Supreme Court dated 04.02.2019 in` `SLP(C)No.7947/2018`
`Exhibit-P24`	`True copy of the Order of the Hon’ble` `Supreme Court dated 26.11.2021 in` `SLP(C)No.7947/2018`
`Exhibit-P25`	`True copy of the Order of the Hon’ble` `Supreme Court dated 24.01.2022 in` `SLP(C)No.7947/2018`
`Exhibit-P26`	`True copy of the Order of the Hon’ble` `Supreme Court dated 04.08.2022 in` `SLP(C)No.7947/2018`
`Exhibit-P27`	`True copy of the Order of the Hon’ble` `Supreme Court dated 19.01.2024 in`

¶155

24

¶156

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶157

2025:KER:26774

¶158

SLP(C)No.7947/2018

¶159

Exhbit-P28

¶160

True copy of the Order of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court dated 28.01.2025 in
SLP(C)No.7947/2018

¶161

EXHIBIT -P10- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF
THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 07.04.2011 IN
I.A.NO.716/2011 IN R.P. NO.OF 2011 IN
DBA.11/2011

¶162

EXHIBIT-P11- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.A9.2467/08 DATED 27.04.2011 ISSUED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶163

EXHIBIT-P12- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.A9.2467/08 DATED 23.06.2011 ISSUED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶164

EXHIBIT-P13- TRUE COPY OF THE
REPRESENTATION DATED 11.11.2013 SUBMITTED
BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE PRESIDENT AND
MEMBERS OFTHE 1ST RESPONDENT

¶165

EXHIBIT-P14- TRUE COPY OF THE
ORDERNO.A9.2467/08 DATED 26.12.2014 ISSUED
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶166

EXHIBIT-P3-TRUE COPY OF THE NOTES OF AUDIT
OF RECEIPT ACCOUNTS OF TRIPUNITHURA
DEVASWOM FOR THE YEAR 2005-06 WAS CONDUCTED
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
LOCAL FUND AUDIT DATED 09/07/2007.

¶167

EXHIBIT-P16- TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT
PAGES OF THE MAJOR ERADAVU REGISTER

¶168

EXHIBIT-P1-TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED
31/07/2006 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

¶169

EXHIBIT-P2-TRUE COPY OF THE PROEEDINGS
DATED 28/09/2006 ISSUED BY THE IST
RESPONDENT

¶170

EXHIBIT-P4-TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED
18/01/2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER

¶171

25

¶172

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶173

2025:KER:26774

¶174

BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶175

EXHIBIT -P15- TRUE COPY OF THE
REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶176

EXHIBIT-P4(A)-TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF
THANTHRI DATED 15/01/2008.

¶177

EXHIBIT-P5(B)-TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.
4173 DATED 04/03/2010 FOR RS. 4,284/-

¶178

EXHIBIT-P5(B)-TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.
4174 DATED 04/03/2010 FOR RS.24,392.25

¶179

EXHIBIT-P5(C)-TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.
4175 DATED 04/03/2010 FOR RS. 450/-

¶180

EXHIBIT-P5(D)-TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.
4176 DATED 04/03/2010 FOR RS.2,346.60

¶181

EXHIBIT-P5(E)-TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.
4183 DATED 24/03/2010 FOR RS.4,284/-

¶182

EXHIBIT-P6-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. A9-
2467/08 DATED 19/05/2010 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.

¶183

EXHIBIT-P7-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. A9-
2467/08 DATED 19/05/2010 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.

¶184

EXHIBIT-P8-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. A9-
2467/08 DATED 19/05/2010 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.

¶185

EXHIBIT-P9-TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION
DATED 03/06/2010 SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶186

EXHIBIT-P9(A)-TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOCOPIES
OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE P.P. REGISTER
DATED 31.10.2002

¶187

EXHIBIT P17-TRUE COPY OF ORDER
NO.A1.9991/15 DATED 18.09.2015 ISSUED BY

¶188

26

¶189

W.P.(C)No.25371 of 2015

¶190

2025:KER:26774

¶191

THE SECOND RESPONDENT

¶192

EXHIBIT-P18-TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION TO
EXT.P17 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE
THE FOURTH REPSONDENT ON 30.12.2015

¶193

EXHIBIT P19 – TRUE COP OF THE
REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS THROUGH PROPER
CHANNEL ON 12.5.2017

Ajayakumar E.K. v. Cochin Devaswom Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajayakumar E.K. v. Cochin Devaswom Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suo Motu Vs State of Kerala

Union of India Vs a.Mohandas

Anil Kumar. K Vs Cochin Devaswom Board

Cochin Devaswom Board Vs *Senior Deputy Director

Nettorkkottu Temple Advisory Committee Vs the Secretary, Travancore Devaswom Board

Njanasekhar, Vs State of Kerala