IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND OCTOBER 2008 / 30TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 16408 of 2008(C) ----------------------------------------- PETITIIONERS: ---------------------- 1. JIJU KRISHNA.T.U, S/.T.R.UNNIKRISHNAN, H. NO. M26, A3, INDIRA NAGAR COLONY, KALLEPULLY.P.O, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. GOPAKUMAR.R, S/O. K.M.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR PRANAVAM HOUSE, KIDANGOOR.P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 3. ANISH KUMAR.S, S/O. N.K. SIVASANKARA PILLAI, NEDUMPALA HOUSE, KULATHUR.P.O, VAIPUR (VIA), PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 4. VIVEK.V.L, SREE VIHAR, KUDASSANAD.P.O, PANDALAM. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.) SRI.S.SUJIN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PRESIDENT, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN, SC, TDB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/10/2008 ALONG WITH WPC NO. 20317 OF 2008, WPC NO. 27659 OF 2008 AND WPC.NO. 27772 OF 2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss V. GIRI, J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NOs.16408,20317,27659 & 27772 of 2008 --------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of October, 2008. JUDGMENT The dispute in these cases relates to the appointment of the Strong Room Guards in the Travancore Devaswom Board. Since the pleadings are comprehensive in WPC.16408/2008, the same is taken as the leading case. The petitioners are included in Ext.P1 select list for the post of Strong Room Guards under the Travancore Devaswom Board. The list was published on 21.10.2005 and was to have a period of validity up to 21.10.2008. The list was enforced and the last appointment was made from the said list on 3.4.2006. Thereafter it was not enforced. The petitioners filed a representation before the Travancore Devaswom Board seeking further enforcement of the list and pointed out with reference to Ext.P2 that there are atleast 9 vacancies which could be filled up by enforcement of the list. They approached this court in WPC.31177/2007 Seeking a direction to the Travancore Devaswom Board to enforce the rank list. This court by Ext.P5 judgment directed the Board to WPC.16408/2008 & conn. cases. 2 take a decision as to whether the select list is to be enforced. The Board by Ext.P6 oder dated 18.4.2008 conveyed the decision not to continue the enforcement of Ext.P1 list. Two reasons have been given therein. Firstly the high power commission headed by a former judge of the supreme court had inter alia looked into the allegations regarding favouritism and nepotism having vitiated appointments in the Travancore Devaswom Board. High power commission had made significant observations regarding corruption, favouritism and nepotism vitiating appointments to various posts and recommended that a High Power Recruitment Board headed by a retired judge of the High Court or administrator of high efficiency and integrity may be appointed to select the right people for various posts. In the meanwhile, it is also relevant to take note of the fact that section 29 A has been introduced in the Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act. The same contemplates appointment to various posts in the Travancore Devaswom Board to be effected on advice by the PSC. Ext.P6 is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. I heard Sri.N.N.Sugunapalan,learned senior counsel, Mr. WPC.16408/2008 & conn. cases. 3 R.T.Pradeep and Mr. B. Unnikrishna Kaimal for the petitioners and Mr. K.N.Venugopala Panicker and Sri. Nagaraj Narayanan for the Travancore Devaswom Board . 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the reasons given in Ext.P6 are not sustainable. The high power commission no doubt looked into the allegations of favouritism and nepotism having vitiated the appointment of the Travancore Devaswom Board. I think there is substance in the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the observations of the high power commission did not specifically deal with the appointment or selection to the post of Strong Room Guards in the Travancore Devaswom Board. At any rate, a reading of the recommendations of the high power commission do not show that the said commission had actually dealt with an allegation regarding the selection which led to Ext.P1. 4. A reading of Ext.P6 reveal the Board's consideration of amendment of the Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act which incidentally was brought into force with effect from 1.7.2008. 5. But I also take note of the contention of the learned WPC.16408/2008 & conn. cases. 4 counsel for the Devaswom Board that tt is still open to the Board to decide on consideration of the over all facts and circumstances not to proceed with the enforcement of the select list, and then decide to go for a fresh selection. Persons who are not included in the list do not acquire any right, merely by inclusion in a rank list. The above reason which finds place in Ext.P6. In the circumstances I am of the view that the Board should reconsider the issue, as originally directed in Ext.P5 judgment. I make it clear that if the Board ultimately finds that they need not further proceed with the enforcement of the select list, they may so decide, but the reasons which persuade the Board should be reasonable, fair and non arbitrary. 6. In the result, Ext.P6 in WPC.No.16408/2008 is quashed. The Board shall reconsider the issue and decide whether the select list should be enforced or existing vacancies in the post of Strong Room Guards in the Devaswom Board should be filled up by a fresh selection. If the Board decides to enforce the select list, then the fact that the period of validity as originally contemplated was only three years need not stand in the way of enforcement of the select list as such. Fresh orders in this regard WPC.16408/2008 & conn. cases. 5 shall be passed within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The order passed in WPC.No.16408/2008 shall be applicable in the case of other writ petitions also. The writ petitions are disposed of as above. V. GIRI, JUDGE. Pmn/