IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD AUGUST 2011 / 12TH SRAVANA 1933 DBP.No. 37 of 2010() -------------------- (IN THE MATTER OF TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD – MARAMATH WORK IN VAIKOM MAHADEVA TEMPLE – TDB REPORT NO.87/2010 SUBMITTED BY THE OMBUDSMAN – SUO MOTU PROCEEDINGS INITIATED – REG.) COMPLAINANT: -------------------- SRI.R.BABY, ALAVELIL MADOM, ARATHUKULANGARA, THEKKENADA P.O., VAIKOM 686142. BY ADV. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, KOTTAYAM. ADV. SRI.K.N.VENUGOPALA PANICKER, SC FOR TDB 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, LOCAL FUND AUDIT, TDB – AUDIT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVT PLEADER SRI.R.LAKSHMI NARAYANAN 4. COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, THRISSUR. ADV.SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP, SC, CDB. SRI.KRISHNAKUMAR MANGOT(AMICUS CURIAE) FOR OMBUDSMAN THIS DEVASWOM BOARD PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ----------------------------------- D.B.P.No.37 OF 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 3rd day of August, 2011 O R D E R Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan,J. Perused the report and the affidavit. We have seen the earlier orders. Though this Court had made certain suggestions as to motivating the service of people who may volunteer service, we do not find any report by the Board of any action taken in that regard. Taking the overall facts and circumstances into consideration, we are of the view that on the basis of the materials, the recommendation of the learned Ombudsman in the report dated 11.6.2010 as TDB report No.87/10 can be accepted and the action taken by the Board authorities be ratified in terms of paragraph 5 of the said report. The Board authorities will take care of the fact that the irregularities pointed out and for which ratification is now being granted are matters which could have been avoided if there was proper care to ensure that timely DBP.37/10 2 sanction was obtained in such matters. Therefore, we direct that in future, steps shall be taken well in advance to obtain sanction orders in relation to such works and this order shall not be treated as a precedent for obtaining ex post facto sanction or for ratification of such irregular acts. The DBP is ordered accordingly. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. Sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN, Judge. kkb.4/8.