IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 19TH DECEMBER 2008 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 DBP.No. 10 OF 2008 (IN THE MATTER OF TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD - GENERAL ADMINISTRATION - IN THE MATTER OF REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE HON'BLE OMBUDSMAN) PARTIES THE SECRETARY, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.M 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMET SECRETRIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI. V. KRISHNA MENON, S.C. FOR TDB. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER BY ADV. SRI. KRISHNAKUMAR MANGOT - AMICUS CURIAE FOR OMBUDSMAN. THIS DEVASWOM BOARD PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ORDERS ON 19/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN & T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = D.B.P. NO. 10 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2008. O R D E R The Ombudsman, in Report No. 88 (renumbered as D.B.P. 10/2008) filed before this Court, brought to our notice certain transfers and postings effected by the Travancore Devaswom Board and sought for necessary direction to restore the position for a smooth and efficient functioning during Sabarimala season. 2. Sri. G. Anil Kumar was working as an Accommodation Officer at Sabarimala who was an employee chosen by the Devaswom Commissioner to assist him in the various works at Sabarimala. We had , by a detailed order, while constituting the High Power Committee, specifically directed not to disturb the employees working at Sabarimala and Pampa during the Mandalam and Makaravilakku season and we had given full power to the High Power Committee in this regard because if a person entrusted with a particular work all on a sudden is transferred without notice and knowledge of the High Power Committee, it may create some difficulties in the administration especially because during the Sabarimala season various works will have to be attended with continuity and with efficacy and since DBP 10/2008 :2: the entire affairs are now entrusted with the High Power Committee persons having confidence of that committee should be continued in key posts. But Sri. G. Anil Kumar was transferred and suspended pending enquiry by the Board. We have gone through the file and prima facie we felt that continuation of suspension is not necessary and subsequently, during the pendency of the proceeding of the Board, it was reported that the Board has reinstated him in service which fact was recorded in the W.P.(C) 24742/2008. Now what is pending is only the disciplinary action, if any, to be finalised. Strictly speaking, Sri. Anil Kumar could not have been transferred in the absence of any permission obtained especially in the light of the earlier order passed by this Court. Nothing on record is produced to show that any consultation was made with the Chairman of the High Power Committee. As regards the further proceedings of Sri. Anil Kumar is concerned, we have already passed orders in the connected writ petition. 3. The next case is that of one M. Satheesh Kumar who was working as P.A. to the Commissioner. He was in the cadre of Deputy Devaswom Commissioner who was reverted as Assistant Commissioner and then transferred. The explanation offered for the reversion of Satheesh Kumar is that one B. Unikrishnan Nair, who was kept under suspension, while he was working as Deputy Commissioner, has been subsequently reinstated, DBP 10/2008 :3: pending further enquiry and posted at Thiruvananthapuram and as a result, one post of Deputy Commissioner has to be adjusted and the junior most being Satheesh Kumar, he is reverted. But no satisfactory explanation is offered as to why Satheesh Kumar was not allowed to continue with the Commissioner. However, during the course of discussion, the Standing Counsel submitted to us a communication of the Travancore Devaswom Board to the effect that if the Devaswom Commissioner desires to retain Satheesh Kumar, there is no impedement in doing so by transferring an officer who has put in maximum period of service in Devaswom Commssioner's Office by observing the rules in force. Since Sri. Satheesh Kumar was disturbed by a reversion order, we think till the Sabarimala season is over, he will be allowed to continue in the Office of the Commissioner without any condition as stated in the communication referred to above, on working arrangement. 4. We have gone through the file relating to Sri. Balagangadharan. It appears that due to personal reasons he had some difficulties in working at Sabarimala. Even though he was given light work at Pampa, considering his health and his family problems, we do not think that any interference is called for in his matter, at this stage. He has not made any complaint with regard thereto. DBP 10/2008 :4: 5. In the case of Mohanan, whatever exemption has been granted, we, in the factual situation, direct that no further exemption shall be granted. It is submitted by the Standing Counsel that he will be reporting for duty during the second spell if not already reported so far. The Board may ensure compliance of the same. 6. No person from among the staff in Sabarimala and Pampa posted on special duty be disturbed without placing it before the High Power Committee and without getting orders from this Court. Both the Board and the Commissioner will abide by the directions without giving room for any complaint of this nature. Copy of this order may be handed over to all the parties concerned. P.R. RAMAN, (JUDGE) T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, (JUDGE) knc/-