TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD Vs. ASHOK KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Does the Rule 55 of Part I Kerala Service Rules [herein after referred to as the 'KSR'] providing payment of subsistence allowance to an employee under suspension is applicable to a 'Karanma' employee of a temple [nominated by the senior most member of the family having hereditary right], is the point raised in W.A. No. 427 of 2014. Is the termination of service of the 'Karanma' employee [on coming across some delinquency on his part or on being not satisfied with the service rendered by him], giving notice to the senior most member of the family requiring to nominate another member of the family in terms of Section 28 (2) of the Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act 1950 ['TCHRI' for short] and Rules 12 and 13 of the Rules framed under Section 28 of the said Act regarding the 'Karanma' Service [herein after referred to as the 'Rules'] is alien to the Scheme of the Statute or does it violate the principles of natural justice, is the point raised by the 'Karanma' employee in W.P.(C) No. 8545 of 2014. Does the Kerala CCS [CCA] Rules govern the field of disciplinary action, in the case of a 'Karanma' employee and if a full-fledged enquiry is warranted in such case, is the incidental question to be answered.

(2.) For convenience of reference, the pleadings and proceedings are referred to as given in W.P.(C) No. 8545 of 2014, except where it is separately dealt with.

(3.) The sequence of events reveals that the petitioner 'Karanma' employee was serving the Thirkkariyoor Devaswom, as nominated by the Head of the family, by virtue of the hereditary right conferred in this regard. While so, on 20.01.2013, a private news channel [India Vision] telecast some news as to the malpractices pursued by the employees in counting the contents of the 'Hundi' installed at Thrikkariyoor Sree Mahadeva Temple on 05.01.2013, involving the petitioner Karanma employee as well, revealing misappropriation of money deposited by the devotees in the 'Hundi'. The petitioner 'Karanma' employee and a 'Kazhakom' employee by name Asok Kumar were placed under suspension as per Ext. P1 order passed by the second respondent/Devaswom Commissioner in charge; besides suspending two officers of the Devaswom Board [Assistant Devaswom Commissioner, Thrikkariyoor group and Sub Group Officer of the Thrikkariyoor Devaswom].