IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2009 / 2ND MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 28499 of 2006(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SMT.K.M.RUGMINI W/O.O.P.JAYAPRAKASH AGED 45 YEARS VAZHIPAD ASSISTANT SREE ANNAPURNESWARI TEMPLE CHERUKUNNU, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI (SR.) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER, HR&CE(ADMN) DEPART, CIVIL STATION, CALICUT-673 020. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,HR&CE(ADMN) DEPT, THALASSYERY. 3. EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CHIRAKKAL KOVILAKOM DEVASWOM, CHIRAKKAL PO, KANNUR-670011. 4. V.V.PRABHU, EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CHIRAKKAL DEVASWOM, CHIRAKKAL PO, KANNUR-670011. ADV. SRI.T.A.RAMADASAN FOR R3 & R4 SRI.CIBI THOMAS FOR R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO: 28499 OF 2006 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT In this writ petition the matter relates to the dispute between the petitioner and the Executive Officer of the Chirakkal Kovilakam Devaswom. 2. The petitioner has been working as Vazhipad Assistant under the third respondent temple. By Ext.P1, according to the petitioner, she was denuded from her duty as Vazhipad Assistant and has to perform the duties in the temple relating to the distribution of Prasadam etc. Ext.P1 is the order passed by the Executive Officer of the Devaswom. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the Executive Officer explaining the action taken by him. The first respondent has also filed a counter affidavit. In the counter affidavit filed by the first respondent, it is stated that the petitioner’s remedy against Ext.P1 is to file a revision petition under Section 18 of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951, before the Commissioner. A reading of Section 18 shows that the Commissioner may call for and examine the record of any proceedings of the Deputy or Assistant Commissioner, of any Area Committee, or of any trustee (not being the trustee of a math or of a specific endowment attached to a math, in respect of which a suit or an appeal to a Court is provided by this Act), to satisfy himself as to the regularity of such proceeding, or the correctness, legality or propriety of wpc:28499 of 2006 2 any decision or order passed therein. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the Devaswom submitted that as per the scheme an appeal has been provided before the trustee. Under Section 18 of the Act, the remedy of the petitioner is against an order passed by the trustee or an order passed by the Deputy or Assistant Commissioner, or Area Committee. Therefore, as per the Scheme the remedy of the petitioner is to approach the trustee itself in the matter by filing an appeal. Against the proceedings of the Executive Officer of the temple, the writ petition is not maintainable. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner may be given sufficient time to file an appeal before the trustee. The petitioner is accordingly given one month’s time to file an appeal and within one month thereafter appropriate decision will be taken in the matter. With the liberty to do so, the writ petition is closed. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE bps