JAYAKRISHNAN S. Vs. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is stated to have served the 1st respondent - Travancore Devaswom Board ('Board' for short) in the post of 'Nadaswaram', concedes that he was removed from service on account of certain grave allegations. He, however, submits that subsequent to his punishment being imposed by the Board, he was acquitted through Ext.P9 judgment by the Sessions Court and therefore, that he has approached the Board with Ext.P10 representation seeking that his punishment be reviewed on account of his exoneration. The petitioner, therefore, prays that the respondents be directed to reinstate him in service forthwith and that Exts.P5,P6 and P8 be quashed, since it now stands contrary to the findings in Ext.P9 judgment of the Sessions Court.

(2.) In response to the afore submissions of Shri.D.Ajith Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for th Board, Shri.C.K.Pavithran, submitted that in normal circumstances a review of the punishment of the petitioner is not possible, particularly because the same had been imposed as early as in the year 2013, it having thus attained finality. He, however, conceded that the petitioner's representation, namely Ext.P10, has not yet been considered and that if this Court is so inclined, the Board is willing to look into the same in the light of Ext.P9; however praying that this Court may not make any affirmative declarations on the entitlement of the petitioner to any relief and leave it to the competent Authority to take a decision thereon as per law.

(3.) Taking note of the afore submissions, I am of the certain view that this Court cannot enter into the merits of the contentions of the petitioner, especially because the aspects involved are in the realm of disciplinary action, into which this Court cannot intervene under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.