SUKUMARAN N Vs. GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Managing Committee of the Guruvayoor Devaswom by Resolution No. 8, dated August 12, 1993 resolved to revert the writ petitioners to the lower post of Sweepers and further to withhold their promotion for a period of three years. The Committee also ordered that the writ petitioners should deposit Rs. 101 to the Hundi taking a pledge that such misconduct would not be repeated. Decision was later confirmed by the Committee as per Resolution No. 41 dated March 19, 1996. Punishment imposed was communicated to the writ petitioners by Exhibit P-4 order. Aggrieved by the said order, petitioners have approached this Court. Learned single Judge found no reason to exercise jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution and dismissed the writ petition. Aggrieved by the same this writ appeal has been preferred.

(2.) Charges levelled against the writ petitioners were that suit No. 6 of Sreevalsam Guest House of the Guruvayoor temple was used by them for immoral traffic. Assistant Manager in charge of the Guest House on April 22, 1993 reported that suit No. 6 in the Sreevalsam Guest House was allotted to a woman with ulterior motives on the early morning of 1993 and the writ petitioners went to that suit and attempted to have illicit relationship with the said woman. It is alleged in the report that the fourth petitioner was on duty as Room Boy in the Sreevalsam Guest House from 10.00 p.m. on April 19, 1993 till 6. 00 a.m. on April 20, 1993. It was with his knowledge and connivance that other writ petitioners got an opportunity to bring the woman for illegal occupation of suit No. 6. They were on duty elsewhere and had no necessity to come over to Sreevalsam Guest House. The Committee appointed Assistant Manager as the enquiry officer to conduct enquiry. Writ petitioners were kept under suspension and the Assistant Manager who was appointed as the enquiry officer submitted report on June 25, 1993. The disciplinary authority was not satisfied with the report and appointed the Devaswom Finance Officer to conduct a fresh enquiry. After scrutinising the evidence of the witnesses and the circumstances of the case, the enquiry officer submitted a detailed report on August 26, 1993 holding the petitioners guilty of the charges levelled against them. The Committee found that the incident lowered the reputation of the Devaswom among the public and therefore decided to revert the petitioners to the lower post of Sweeper and to withhold their promotion for a period of three years.

(3.) The enquiry files with the reports were placed before us. We have gone through the reports of the enquiry officers and other relevant records. Petitioners attacked the action of the Committee in rejecting the first enquiry report and appointing another enquiry officer whose report was accepted. Learned Judge found no infirmity in the said action of the Managing Committee.