Nils V.G. v. Kerala Devaswom Recruitment Board, Guruvayur Devaswom Board and Others

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** # **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 24TH ``` ``` AGRAHAYANA, 1944 ``` ## **`WP(C) NO. 2179 OF 2021`** ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` NILS V.G. AGED 38 YEARS SON OF GOPINATHAN, RESIDING AT VELIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KIZHUPPILLIKKARA P.O., THRISSUR - 680 702. BY ADVS. REKHA VASUDEVAN SMT.ELIZABETH V.JOSEPH ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - `1 KERALA DEVASWOM RECRUITMENT BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD BUILDING, M.G.ROAD, AYURVEDA COLLEGE JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.` - `2 GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR, EAST NADA, GURUVAYUR, THRISSUR - 680 101.` - `3 VADYA VIDYALAYAM REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL, GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM BOARD, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR - 680 101.` - `4 ADDL.R4. RAJESH KUMAR.P S/O. HARI NARAYANAN RESIDING AT MELEKKALATHIL HOUSE,T/142/L10, CHETHALLUR, MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD-678583` - `5 ADDL.R5.SACHIN SURESH S/O SURESH N.V, RESIDING AT NELLISSERY HOUSE, MADAYIKONAM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR680712` - `6 ADDL.R6.PREMDAS.V.M. S/O MOHANDAS, RESIDING AT VALYAMGOTTU, 7 175B, PACHALIPPURAM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR-680302` ## **W.P (C) No.2179/21** ..2.. ``` 7ADDL.R7.AJITH KUMAR.K.C. S/O CHANDRAMOHANAN, RESIDING AT PAINGODE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR-680123. (ADDL R4 TO R7 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 03/03/2021 IN I.A.NO.1/2021 IN WPC 2179/2021) 8ADDL.R8 KAKKAD VADYAKALA KSHETHRAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KAKKAD, KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR DIST, KERALA-680503 [ADDL.R8 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER ORDER DATED 14/11/2022 IN I.A.NO:2/22 IN WP(C) 2179/2021] BY ADVS. SHRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR, SC, KERALA DEVASWOM RECRUITMENT BOARD SHRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SC, GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM BOARD SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON PREMCHAND M. SRI.P.S.APPU P.C.SASIDHARAN Sri.T.K.Vipindas-SC ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` **W.P (C) No.2179/21** ..3.. ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner participated in the selection process for the appointment of teacher in “Kurumkuzhal” in the services of “Guruvayur Devaswom Vadhya Vidyalayam”; but concedes that he was placed Rank No.5, below respondents 4 to 7. He admits that the 4[th] respondent - Sri.Rajeshkumar P., was offered selection by the Guruvayur Devaswom on the strength of his ranking as No.1; but asserts that the entire selection process was a mere eyewash, because said person entered services in the Guruvayur Devaswom as a daily wage employee, under the influence of his uncle, who was the then Principal of the “Vadhya Vidyalayam”. He contends that obviously, therefore, the interview board manipulated their actions in such a manner, that the 4[th] respondent could be given the highest marks and that Ext.P6 Rank List is vitiated. 2. Interestingly, in substantiation of his credentials, the 4[th] respondent filed a counter affidavit producing therewith certain documents, including Ext.R4(b) – which is stated to have been issued by the 8[th] respondent – “Kakkad **W.P (C) No.2179/21** ..4.. Vadyakala Kshethram”. 3. The petitioner, thereupon, filed an application, producing another certificate issued by the afore said institution, to assert that Ext.R4(b) is fraudulent because the inscription 'കേ രളസർക്കാർഅംഗീകൃതം' therein is not available in the other certificates issued by it. 4. Hearing the petitioner as afore, I passed an order on 14.11.2022 in the following manner: _Though there are various issues projected in this case, the one that grips my mind is the authenticity of Ext.R4(b) Certificate. This is because, Smt.Rekha Vasudevan – learned counsel for the petitioner, points out that a similar certificate issued by the said respondent does not mention that it is approved by the Government and the signatures therein, vary with that shown in Ext.R4(b)._ _2. There is some force in the afore submissions._ _3. However, since the 8[th] respondent has not entered appearance in spite of service, this Court deems it necessary to direct the 2[nd] respondent – Devaswom Board, to obtain from_ **W.P (C) No.2179/21** ..5.. _them a clarification relating to the authenticity of Ext.R4(b)._ _For such purpose, I direct the 4[th] respondent to produce the original of Ext.R4(b) before the Administrator of the 2[nd] respondent – Guruvayur Devaswom Board at 11 A.M. on 18.11.2022. However, if the said certificate is already with the Devaswom Board, then the 4[th] respondent shall be told of the same on that date._ _On the certificate being so produced, the Administrator will obtain a report from the 8[th] respondent as to its authenticity and place it before this Court, through the learned Standing Counsel for the Devaswom Board. This shall be done not later than 25.11.2022._ 5. Simultaneously thereto, this Court impleaded the 8[th] respondent and issued notice to them. 6. Subsequently, Sri.M.Premchand – learned counsel for the 8[th] respondent, appeared and affirmed the report of the Administrator of the Guruvayur Devaswom, to the effect that Ext.R4(b) does not appear to be genuine. 7. It is in the afore scenario that this matter has been considered today. ## **W.P (C) No.2179/21** **==> picture [20 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** 8. Sri.Vipin Das – learned Standing Counsel for the Devaswom Board, submitted that the original of Ext.R4(b), along with another letter from the 8[th] respondent dated 20.05.2018 was available with him; and handed over both across the Bar, requesting this Court to verify the genuineness. 9. Sri.Vipin Das, thereafter, submitted that, going by the letter of the 8[th] respondent dated 20.05.2018, it certifies that the 4[th] respondent, under the tutelage of Sri.Chemmanthatta Narayanan Nair, had completed the course in “Kurumkuzhal”, consequent to which, he has been performing, both for the said institution and outside. The learned Standing Counsel argued that, in such circumstances, even assuming that Ext.R4(b) is not genuine, selection of the 4[th] respondent by the Devaswom Recruitment Board cannot be faulted; adding to it, saying that there is still a valid doubt if the said document is genuine or otherwise. 10. Sri.Vipin Das explained that he is saying so because, one of the signatories to the said certificate is known to sign at least in two different manner and that this is clear from his own declaration contained in Ext.R2(a). He concluded saying that, **W.P (C) No.2179/21** ..7.. in any event, even if the selection of the 4[th] respondent is found to be untenable by this Court, the petitioner will not get any benefit because, as admitted by himself, he is placed Rank No.5, while the other party respondents are above him. 11. On the final argument of the petitioner, that the post in question deserves to be reserved for OBC category, Sri.Vipin Das submitted that this is also impossible because law has been well settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in various judgments, that a single post cannot be so reserved. 12. Smt.Rekha Vasudevan – learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, contested the afore submissions of Sri.Vipin Das, saying that what is relevant is not whether Ext.R4(b) is genuine or otherwise, but if the processes conducted by the Devaswom Recruitment Board was proper. She added that, since Ext.R4(b) has been found to be suspicious, the Board is now required to verify the credentials of all the party respondents and also that of her client and recast the Rank list, so as to make fresh appointment therefrom, if so required. 13. Sri.M.Premchand - learned Standing Counsel for the 8[th] respondent, submitted that, at first glance, Ext.R4(b) **W.P (C) No.2179/21** ..8.. appears to be not genuine; but that this is because the inscription 'കേ രളസർക്കാർഅംഗീകൃതം' found therein is not usually incorporated in other certificates issued by his client. He, however, conceded that one of the signatories to the said certificate signs in multiple manner and therefore, that the validity of Ext.R4(b) can only be found through a proper Forensic examination. 14. Sri.P.C. Sasidharan – learned Standing Counsel appering for the Devaswom Recruitment Board, submitted that his client had acted on the basis of the certificates presented before them by the petitioner, as also the party respondents; and that, they had no reason to suspect that any of the credentials were bogus or manipulated. He added that, if this Court is inclined to think otherwise, then necessary action will certainly be taken by his client, if so ordered. 15. From the above, it is luculent that there are broadly three issues involved in this case, namely: a. Whether the post in question can be reserved for an OBC; b. Whether the certificate produced by the 4[th] **W.P (C) No.2179/21** ..9.. respondent is suspicious, so as to maintain his rejection from the selection process, as also the appointment; and c. Whether petitioner is entitled to be considered for appointment based on his rank in Ext.P6? 16. As regards the first of the afore issues, it does not require expatiation from me to conclude that a single post can never be reserved and this has been well settled by various judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, including _**State of Karnataka v. K. Govindappa**_ [(2009) 1 SCC 1]. In fact, Smt.Rekha Vasudevan - learned counsel for the petitioner conceded to this, but argued that her client is still eligible to be considered in the open competition because, the credentials of other party repsondents are suspicious. 17. Thus coming to the second of the afore issues, it is impossible for this Court to make an affirmative assessment whether Ext.R4(b) is genuine or otherwise because, it will require proper analysis, through scientific techniques, for such purpose. Though full liberty is left to the Guruvayur Devaswom for such, the fact remains that the letter issued by the 8[th] respondent dated 20.05.2018 - the original of which has been **W.P (C) No.2179/21** ..10.. handed across the Bar and a copy of which will be placed in the Judge’s Papers by the Registry – indicates that 4[th] respondent had completed the course in the 8[th] respondent - Institution. This, certainly, is an aspect that Guruvaryur Devaswom can verify and if it is found to be not genuine, then necessary action, including for re-notification of the post, or for filling it up from other party respondents and the petitioner, can be taken forward. This is not merely a liberty left to them, but they are obliged to verify this through proper processes, including in consultation with the 8[th] respondent and after hearing the petitioner and the 4[th] respondent. 18. As far as the last of the afore limbs is concerned, the question whether petitioner is entitled to be granted appointment would certainly depend upon the afore said exercise and only if the credentials of the 4[th] respondent are found to be not genuine. In such event, certainly the Guruvayur Devaswom must requisition the Recruitment Board for evaluation of all the candidates and offer the appointment to the most eligible among them. In such scenerio, this writ petition is ordered, with the **W.P (C) No.2179/21** ..11.. following directions: a. The Administrator of the Guruvayur Devaswom or such other of its competent Authority, is directed to verify the credentials of the 4[th] respondent, in consultation with the 8[th] respondent, adverting to the letter of the latter dated 20.05.2018, or such other inputs as may be relevant; and take a decision whether he is entitled to continue in appointment. This shall be done after hearing the petitioner, as also the party respondents, and concluded through a proper proceeding. b. If, for any reason, the appointment of the 4[th] respondent is found to be not tenable, then the competent Authority of the Guruvayur Devaswom will inform the Devaswom Recruitment Board appropriately; in which event, said Authority will invite the party respondents and the petitioner - who are included in the Ranked List, and after verification of their credentials, offer it to the most eligible among them in terms of their ranking in Ext.P5. I record that the learned Standing Counsel for the Guruvayur Devaswom – Sri.Vipindas has affirmed that this can **W.P (C) No.2179/21** **==> picture [26 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** be done. I, however, clarify that no other vacancy will be filled up through the afore ordered process. Sd/- **DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE** SAS/ACR **W.P (C) No.2179/21** ..13.. ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2179/2021`** ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS ``` ``` EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE SSLC BOOK OF THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P1(A)TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 08/12/2018 ISSUED BY THE THRISSUR VADYAGURUKULAM TO THE PETI6TIONER. EXHIBIT P1(B)TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 08/12/2018 ISSUED BY SRI KOMBATH ANILKUMAR. EXHIBIT P1(C)TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 06/11/2020 ISSUED BY SRI KOMATH ANILKUMAR TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.583/R1/2019/D.R.B. DATED 18/03/2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.583/R1/2019/KDRB DATED 04/11/2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE NON CREAMY LAYER CERTIFICATE DATED 12/11/2020 ISSUED FROM THE KIZHUPPILLIKKARA VILLAGE OFFICE. EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE RANK LIST NO.11/2020 DATED 18/12/2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF THE RANK LIST NO.9/2020 DATED 18/12/2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF THE RANK LIST NO.10/2020 DATED 18/12/2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8TRUE COPY OF THE RANK LIST NO.10/2020 DATED 18/12/2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P9TRUE COPY OF THE UGC GUIDELINES FOR STRICT IMPLEMENTATION OF RESERVATION POLICY OF THE GOVERNMENT IN UNIVERSITIES, DEEMED TO BE UNIVERSITIES, COLLEGES AND OTHER GRANT- IN-AID INSTITUTIONS AND CENTRES. ``` ## **W.P (C) No.2179/21** ..14.. ``` EXHIBIT P10TRUE COPY OF THE CENTRAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS (RESERVATION IN TEACHERS CADRE) ORDINANCE, 2019. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P11TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.F.1- 5/2006(SCT) DATED 08/03/2019 ISSUED BY THE JOINT SECRETARY, UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION. ``` - `RESPONDENT EXHIBITS` - `Exhibit R4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE SECONDARY SCHOOL LEAVING CERTIFICATE OF THE ADDITIONAL 4TH RESPONDENT.` - `Exhibit R4(b) TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF MERIT ISSUED BY THE KAKKAD VADYAKALA KSHETHRAM, DATED 17/08/2005.` - `Exhibit R4(c) TRUE COPY OF THE RECOMMENDATION LETTER ISSUED BY MATTANUR SANKARANKUTTY MARAR, DATED 10/07/2020.` - `Exhibit R4(d) TRUE COPY OF THE RECOMMENDATION LETTER ISSUED BY PERUVANAM KUTTAN MARAR, DATED 10/10/2020.` - `PETITIONER EXHIBITS` - `Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE NEWSPAPER REPORT AS DOWNLOADED FROM THE WEBSITE OF THE THE HINDU` - `Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF THE WIKEPEDIA WEB PAGES WITH RESPECT TO SRI PERUVANAM KUTTAN MARAR` - `Exhibit P15 TRUE COPY OF THE COURSE COMPLETION CERTIFCATE DATED 9/10/2012 ISSUED BY THE PRASADAM SATSANGA SAMITHI` - `Exhibit P16 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 6/11/2020 ISSUED BY SRI.KOMABATHU ANIL KUMAR` - `Exhibit P17 TRUE COPY OF THE BIODATA OF THE PETITIONER` - `Exhibit P18 TRUE COPY OF THE WEB PAGE OF KAKKAD VADYAKALA KSHETRAM AS DOWNLOADED FROM THE WEBSITE OF` - `WW.KERALATOURISM.OTG/TRAININGCENTRES` - `RESPONDENT EXHIBITS` ``` EXHIBIT R2(a)A true copy of the statatement Of M.S.Rajeshkumar@Kakkad Rajappan Marar EXHIBIT R2(c)A true copy of The Specimen Of the ``` **W.P (C) No.2179/21** ..15.. ``` certificate being issued by the Kakkad Vadya Kalakshethram EXHIBIT R2(b)A true copy of The recognition certificate issued dy the Kerale Sangeetha Nadaka Academy to Kakkd Vadya Kalakshethram dated 28-06-2019 ``` ``` Exhibit R8(a)TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE REG NO. TSR/TC/497/2000 DATED 30/06/2014. Exhibit R8(b)TRUE COPY OF A CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL 8TH RESPONDENT TO A STUDENT WHO COMPLETED THE COURSE FROM THE ADDITIONAL 8TH RESPONDENT DATED 07/08/2016. ```