IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 2ND SEPTEMBER 2010 / 11TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 28577 of 2005(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER : --------------- KANNAN, WATHER VAIKOM DEVASWOM BOARD, S/O.NARAYANAN CHETTIAR, ARYA SAMOOHAM, KIZHAKKENADA, THEKKENADA P.O. VAIKOM DISTRICT KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.REGHU KOTTAPPURAM RESPONDENTS : --------------- 1. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, NANDANKODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANDANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, VAIKOM DEVASWOM, VAIKOM, DISTRICT KOTTAYAM. R1 TO R3 SRI.P.G.PARAMESWARA PANICKER, SENIOR ADVOCATE & SRI.P.GOPAL,SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/08/2010, THE COURT ON 02/09/2010 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK WP(C).No. 28577 of 2005(B) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1. COPY OF INTERIM ORDER DATED 3.6.03 IN W.P.(C) NO.17149/03. EXT.P2. COPY OF THE ORDER R.O.C. 8976/03/MIS-A DATED 15.10.03. EXT.P3. COPY OF THE ORDER VIDE N.2376 DATED 20.2.04. EXT.P4. COPY OF THE REPLY VIDE ROC NO.3223/04/MIS-A DATED 26.3.04 EXT.P5. COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE VIDE NO.ROC NO.3223/04/MIS-A DATED 28.6.04. EXT.P6. COPY OF THE ORDER NO.ROC NO.3223/04/MIS-A DATED 27.7.04. EXT.P7. COPY OF THE ORDER NO.ROC NO.3223/04/MIS-A DATED 31.7.04. EXT.P8. COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 25.1.05 SENT BY THE PETTONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P9 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.6.05 IN W.P.(C) 18924/05. EXT.P10 COPY OF THE ORDER VIDE ROC NO.3223/04/MIS-1 DATED 6.9.05. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL VK S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.28577 OF 2005 ------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is an employee of the Travancore Devaswom Board. On allegation that he misappropriated the amount in a purse belonging to a worshipper entrusted to him by another worshipper, found lying on the floor of the temple, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him. Pursuant thereto, Ext.P6 order of punishment of barring of three annual increments with cumulative effect was imposed on the petitioner. The petitioner's appeal against the same, which was directed to be disposed of by Ext.P9 judgment of this Court, was rejected by Ext.P10 order. The petitioner is challenging Exts.P6 and P10 orders. 2. No counter affidavit has been filed. I specifically asked the learned counsel for the Board as to what are the rules regarding disciplinary proceedings against an employee of the Board. He submits that as far as temple employees are W.P.(c)No.28577/05 2 concerned, the Board has framed separate rules regarding disciplinary proceedings with effect from 1.1.1972. But he fairly submits that those rules contain barring of increments is not a punishment prescribed in the Rules. If that be so, Ext.P6 order of punishment and Ext.P10 order dismissing his appeal are not sustainable. Accordingly, they are quashed. It would be open to the second respondent to pass fresh orders in accordance with the rules. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(c)No.28577/05 3 W.P.(c)No.28577/05 4