IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 4TH JULY 2011 / 13TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17255 of 2011(F) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- V.N.VINODKUMAR, MELSANTHI, P.D.MANIKANDESWARAM DEVASWOM, (GANAPATHY TEMPLE, KOTTARAKKARA), KOTTARAKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.S.NAMPOOTHIRY. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD- REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEVASWOM BOARD OFFICE, NANDANKODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANDANKODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KOTTARAKKARA DEVASWOM GROUP, KOTTARAKKARA, PIN-691 506. 4. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, P.D.MANIKANDESWARAM DEVASWOM, (KOTTARAKKARA GANAPATHY TEMPLE), KOTTARAKKARA-691 506. 5. K.THULASEEDAS, MELSANTHI, ARUKALIKKAL DEVASWOM, KOTTARAKKARA, RESIDING AT "KARTHIKA", KALAYAPURAM P.O, PIN - 691 506, KOTTARAKKARA. R1 TO R4 BY SRI. G. BIJU, S.C, R5 BY ADVS. SRI.C.K.PRASAD, SRI.SHABU SREEDHARAN, SRI.T.S.ANURAJ, SRI.B.BALA PRASANNAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.17255/2011-F: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER FOR TRANSFER. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.2. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. 5848 DTD. 14/06/2011 TRANSFERRING THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. R.O.C. 59/2011/5 DTD. 24/06/2011 ISSUED BY THE R.2. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 134/05 DTD. 10/02/2005 ISSUED BY THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P(C)No.17255 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated 4th July, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a Melsanthi under the Travancore Devaswom Board. This writ petition has been filed challenging Ext.P4 order of transfer. The petitioner was working as Melsanthi in Kootharadi Devaswom under Arukalekkal sub group. Since he has completed three years of service in the said station the petitioner submitted Ext.P1 application for transfer. Feeling aggrieved by the order passed thereon he preferred Ext.P2 appeal before the second respondent. Thereafter, the second respondent considered the same and passed Ext.P3 order dated 14.6.2011 transferring and posting the petitioner as Melsanthi in P.D.Manikandeswaram Devaswom under the Kottarakkara Group. Pursuant to the said order of transfer he joined there on 15.6.2011. Without notice to the petitioner the said Ext.P3 order was cancelled and as per Ext.P4 the petitioner was ordered to be posted back to Kootharadi Devaswom. It is in the said circumstances that this writ petition has been filed challenging Ext.P4. 2. When this matter came up for admission on 27.6.2011 this Court admitted the writ petition. The learned standing counsel takes WP(C).No.17255/2011 2 notice for respondents 1 to 4 and notice was issued to the 5th respondent by special messenger. Consequently, the fifth respondent entered appearance. On consent of parties I took up the matter for consideration on merits. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner brought to my notice Ext.P3 order passed by the appellate authority viz., the second respondent. It is pursuant to the said order that the petitioner joined at P.D.Manikandeswaram Devaswom on 15.6.2011. As already noticed hereinbefore, the grievance of the petitioner is that the order in Ext.P3 was cancelled without notice to him. That apart, it is his contention that the fifth respondent who is junior to him based on station seniority has been posted to P.D.Manikandeswaram Devaswom in his place. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent submitted that earlier, raising grievances against the order of the appellate authority viz., Ext.P3 he had approached the Devaswom Board. Since the Board took no action on his appeal he was constrained to move this Court by filing W.P.(C)No.16385 of 2011. The said writ petition was disposed of by judgment dated 17.6.2011 with a direction to the first respondent viz., the Travancore Devaswom Board to consider and pass orders on his appeal referred to as Ext.P4 therein, after affording an opportunity of being heard WP(C).No.17255/2011 3 to himself and to the petitioner herein who was the 4th respondent therein. The learned counsel for respondents 1 to 4 submitted that pursuant to the said direction no orders have so far been passed by the Travancore Devaswom Board. Thus, it is obvious that it is in the meanwhile that the second respondent who was also the second respondent in W.P.(C) No.16385 of 2011, passed the present impugned order. In fact, the order is liable to be interfered on that sole ground. When this Court directed the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 appeal, referred as such in W.P.(C)No.16385 of 2011, after affording an opportunity to the parties likely to be affected, that authority is bound to consider and pass orders on the issue in terms of the said judgment. At any rate, an authority subordinate to that authority to whom this Court issued a direction cannot take up the matter and pass orders disregarding the specific directions of this Court. The learned counsel for the fifth respondent submitted that the petitioner was transferred from P.D. Manikandeswaram Devaswom on an earlier occasion based on certain complaints raised by the devotees. However, a scanning of Ext.P4 order would not suggest that the order in Ext.P4 was passed on such a ground. At the same time, the learned standing counsel appearing for the first respondent also supported the said contention raised by the learned WP(C).No.17255/2011 4 counsel for the 5th respondent. In the said circumstances, it is evident that the order in Ext.P4 smacks of punitive. I have no hesitation to hold that it is an order passed in blatant violation of the principles of natural justice, as well. The order impugned is liable to be interfered with on those grounds as well. 5. As already noticed hereinbefore, in an earlier round of litigation between the petitioner and the fifth respondent this Court as per judgment dated 17.6.2011 in W.P.(C)No.16385 of 2011 directed the first respondent Travancore Devaswom Board to consider Ext.P4 appeal referred to therein filed by the fifth respondent herein, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner herein and also the petitioner therein viz., the 5th respondent herein. The second respondent Devaswom Commissioner who was also a party to the said writ petition should not have in the said circumstances passed Ext.P4 order. For all these reasons Ext.P4 order is set aside. It is made clear that this will not stand in the way of the Travancore Devaswom Board to consider Ext.P4 appeal referred to in the judgment in W.P.(C)No.16385 of 2011 and pass orders thereon after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner herein and also the fifth respondent. In fact, they are bound to pass orders in terms of the said judgment. Till such an order is passed and communicated to WP(C).No.17255/2011 5 the petitioner as also to the 5th respondent the petitioner shall be permitted to continue in P.D.Manikandeswaram Devaswom as Melsanthi. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS