High Court Kerala High Court

N.Narayanan Namboodiri vs Travancore Devaswom Board on 28 October, 2009

Kerala High Court
N.Narayanan Namboodiri vs Travancore Devaswom Board on 28 October, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 30163 of 2009(M)


1. N.NARAYANAN NAMBOODIRI,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD
                       ...       Respondent

2. COMMISSIONER,

3. ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER,

4. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, CHENGANNOOR.

                For Petitioner  :SRI.D.SOMASUNDARAM

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.G.PARAMESWARA PANICKER (SR.)

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :28/10/2009

 O R D E R
                       ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
              --------------------------------------------------
                 W.P.(C) NO.30163 OF 2009 (M)
              --------------------------------------------------
           Dated this the 28th day of October, 2009

                           J U D G M E N T

First respondent Board appointed the petitioner as Melsanthi

in Chengannoor Devaswom on Karanma basis. According to the

petitioner since 28.9.2009, he is not permitting to discharge his

duties as Melsanthi.

2. The instruction that the Standing Counsel for the first

respondent has obtained is that, on 28.9.2009, petitioner entered

the Sree Kovil and performed Poojas and other attendant duties,

without wearing the holy thread. It would appear that on noticing

this lapse, the devotees raised a complaint before the Advisory

Committee, which in turn took up the matter with the Administrator.

It is stated that it was because the Advisory Committee and the

devotees had taken objection, the petitioner could not discharge

his duties as Melsanthi. It is also pointed out that from 28.9.2009

evening onwards the petitioner has absented from duty and another

person from the family is discharging the duties of Melsanthi.

3. While the petitioner denies the allegations which are

WPC.No.30163 /09
:2 :

levelled against him, it is seen that the Administrator on receipt of

the complaints had issued Ext.P2 memo to the petitioner and on

receipt thereof petitioner has filed his objections vide Ext.P3.

4. Having regard to the nature of the allegations raised, it is

only appropriate that the Administrator takes a decision on Ext.P2 in

the light of Ext.P3. Once a decision is taken in the matter, if the

decision of the Administrator is to permit the petitioner to discharge

the duties, he shall be permitted to discharge his duties as

Melsanthi of the Temple in question

5. The Administrator is directed to take a final decision in the

matter as above on the production of a copy of the judgment along

with a copy of the writ petition before the 4th respondent.

Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a

copy of the writ petition before the 4th respondent for compliance.

(ANTONY DOMINIC)
JUDGE
vi/