IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2010 / 25TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 34863 of 2009(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER --------------- 1. AJI VELIKKADU, S/O.PARAMESWARAN PILLAI, 'THANIMA', CHILAKKALLOOR, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ASHOK KUMAR, S/O.SADASIVAN PILLAI, ASHOK BHAVAN, PUMAMOODU JUNCTION, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.R.SIVAKUMAR SRI.KRISHNAN.S.RAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF DEVASWOM, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANDANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANDANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, VARKALA GROUP, VARKALA JANARDANA SWAMI TEMPLE, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, VARKALA DEVASWOM, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. WPC 34863/09 6. THE DEPUTY DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANDANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.K.N.VENUGOPALA PANICKER, SC, TDB FOR R2-6 SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON SRI.KRISHNAKUMAR MANGOT R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN & P.S. GOPINATHAN, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = W.P.(C) NO. 34863 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 15TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2010. J U D G M E N T Raman, J. Removal of the Temple Advisory Committee on serious misconduct, has lead to the filing of this writ petition by the removed Committee. The Ombudsman has submitted a report pointing out certain aspects. It is an admitted fact that serious allegations of misappropriation and irregularity in the matter of maintaining accounts are found against the previous committee. But no notice of hearing was given. If the Temple Advisory Committee is removed for any other reason, it is not as though such notice is contemplated under law since the constitution of the Advisory Committee is mainly to assist the Devaswom in the administration of the temple affairs. Therefore, there may not be any vested right as such. But when somebody is accused of having committed misappropriation, a notice could have been given by the Commissioner. However, in the absence of any such vested right and the removal is only from a Temple Advisory Committee, we do not think that the matter requires further consideration, but the reasons WP(C) 34863/2009 2 stand vacated as the finding is without notice. Therefore, while the removal of the committee is not interfered with, the finding is vacated and in case the Commissioner feels that finding has to be sustained for valid reasons, then he may issue notice and afford an opportunity to the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMAN, JUDGE. P.S. GOPINATHAN, JUDGE. KNC/-