IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 11TH OCTOBER 2011 / 19TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 26625 of 2011(C) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- K.E.KRISHNAN NAMBOODIRI, SAVITHRI SADANAM, PUNNALA P.O., PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN, SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD, SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM), SRI.MATHEW SUNNY, SRI.ANOOP.V.NAIR. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, DEVASWOM BOARD OFFICE, DEVASWOM BOARD JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 003. 2. THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, DEVASWOM BOARD OFFICE, DEVASWOM BOARD JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 003. 3. THE ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD OFFICE, THIRUVALLA, PIN - 689 101. 4. THE SUB GROUP OFFICER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, PUTHIYEDAM DEVASWOM, PUNALUR, PIN 691 305. R1 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI. G.BIJU, SC, TDB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.26625/2011 C APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGES ALONG WITH THE STATEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS GIVEN TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 28/11/2008. P2: COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE GIVEN TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 7/10/2010. P3: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.ROC.11267/08/MISC.A. DTD. 26/04/2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P4: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT DTD. 5/06/2011. P5: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 20/09/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.26625 of 2011-C. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 11th October, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner while working as Melsanthi at Padappadu Devaswom was charge sheeted under a memo of charges and a statement of allegations. The allegation against the petitioner is that he had quarreled with the Watchman in the Temple and misappropriated money from the 'Kanika Vanchi'. The petitioner denied the allegations and contended that he had only tried to prevent the Watchman from entering the temple after consuming liquor which resulted in a quarrel. 2. A disciplinary enquiry was ordered into the allegations. According to the petitioner, the enquiry was not conducted properly and the petitioner was not given a proper opportunity to prove his case. On the basis of the report of the enquiry, the petitioner was dismissed from WP(C).No.26625/2011-C. 2 service. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P4 appeal to the first respondent challenging the order of dismissal passed by the 4th respondent. However, the same has not been considered and disposed of till date. 3. The Standing Counsel for the Travancore Devaswom Board submits that since the issue involved is one relating to dismissal, the consideration of the appeal requires perusal of various documents that were relied upon in the course of the proceedings. Therefore, at least three months time is required for disposal of the appeal. 4. Though various contentions have been raised by the petitioner challenging the order of dismissal passed against him, since Ext.P4 appeal is pending consideration before the first respondent, it is not necessary to consider the said contentions on the merit at this stage. It is sufficient that Ext.P4 is directed to be considered and disposed of expeditiously. 5. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the first respondent to consider the appeal filed by WP(C).No.26625/2011-C. 3 the petitioner evidenced herein by Ext.P4 in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner also. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, (Judge) Kvs/-