Travancore Devaswom Board v. Deputy Director, Kerala State Audit Department and State of Kerala

1 DBA No.8 of 2024 ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K. NARENDRAN ``` ``` & ``` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISANKAR V. MENON ``` ``` THURSDAY, THE 18[TH] DAY OF JULY 2024 / 27TH ASHADHA, 1946 ``` ``` DBA NO. 8 OF 2024 ``` ## **`PETITIONER/APPLICANT:`** ``` TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, DEVASWOM HEAD QUARTERS, NANTHANCODE, KOWDIAR POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 695003 ``` ``` BY ADV G.BIJU ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - **`1 DEPUTY DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE AUDIT DEPARTMENT, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD AUDIT, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM HEAD QUARTERS, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695003`** - **`2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (DEVASWOM) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695001.`** ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` SR. GP- SRI. S. RAJMOHAN ``` ``` SRI. G. BIJU, SC, TDB ``` ``` THIS DEVASWOM BOARD APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 2 DBA No.8 of 2024 ## **ORDER** The Travancore Devaswom Board has filed this DBA seeking permission to transfer the officers who are presently working in various posts at Sabarimala, Pamba, Nilakkal and Erumeli, on completion of their tenure and also to post substitutes to their posts, as per Annexure A5 order dated 09.07.2024. The affidavit dated 10.07.2024 filed in support of this DBA is one sworn to by the Secretary of the Board. 2. In paragraph 3 of the affidavit filed in support of this DBA, the details of the present incumbents in the respective posts who need to be transferred are given. Some of the officers have retired also. It is stated that the Board has identified eligible incumbents from among the officers, in terms of the directions issued by this Court in the order dated 01.08.2012 in DBAR No.16 of 2010. Reference has also been made to Annexure A2 report dated 15.06.2024, Annexure A3 report dated 21.06.2024 and also Annexure A4 written instructions dated 04.07.2024 of the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer (Superintendent of Police), Travancore Devaswom Board, Thiruvananthapuram, on the credentials of the officers concerned are placed on record. 3. On 11.07.2024 when this DBA came up for 3 DBA No.8 of 2024 consideration, the matter was adjourned for the learned Senior Government Pleader to get instructions from the 1[st] respondent Deputy Director, Kerala State Audit Department, Travancore Devaswom Board Audit. 4. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board for the applicant and the learned Senior Government Pleader for the respondents. 5. Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950 enacted by the State Legislature makes provision for the administration, supervision, and control of incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms and of other Hindu Religious Endowments and Funds. In view of the provisions under Section 3 of the Act, the administration of incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms and of Hindu Religious Endowments and all their properties and funds as well as the fund constituted under the Devaswom Proclamation, 1097 ME and the surplus fund constituted under the Devaswom (Amendment) Proclamation, 1122 ME shall vest in the Travancore Devaswom Board. Sabarimala, Pampa, Nilakkal and Erumeli Devaswoms are incorporated Devaswoms mentioned in Schedule I of the Act, which are under the management of the Travancore Devaswom 4 DBA No.8 of 2024 Board. 6. Section 15A of the Act, inserted by Act 5 of 2007, with effect from 12.04.2007, deals with the duties of the Board. As per Section 15A, it shall be the duty of the Board to perform the following functions, namely, (i) to see that the regular traditional rites and ceremonies according to the practice prevalent in the religious institutions are performed promptly; (ii) to monitor whether the administrative officials and employees and also the employees connected with religious rites are functioning properly; (iii) to ensure proper maintenance and upliftment of the Hindu religious institutions; (iv) to establish and maintain proper facilities in the temples for the devotees. 7. As per Section 24 of the Act, which deals with the maintenance of Devaswoms, etc., out of the Devaswom Fund, the Board shall, out of the Devaswom Fund constituted under Section 25, maintain the Devaswoms mentioned in Schedule I [i.e. incorporated Devaswoms], keep in a state of good repair the temples, buildings, and other appurtenances thereto, administer the said Devaswoms in accordance with recognised usages, make contributions to other Devaswoms in or outside the State and meet the expenditure for the customary religious ceremonies and 5 DBA No.8 of 2024 may provide for the educational upliftment, social and cultural advancement and economic betterment of the Hindu community. 8. As per Section 31 of the Act, which deals with the management of Devaswoms, subject to the provisions of Part I and the rules made thereunder, the Board shall manage the properties and affairs of the Devaswoms, both incorporated and unincorporated as heretofore, and arrange for the conduct of the daily worship and ceremonies and of the festivals in every temple according to its usage. 9. In **Ram Mohan Das v. Travancore Devaswom Board and others [1975 KLT 55]** a learned Single Judge of this Court held that, under Section 31 of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, the Travancore Devaswom Board shall manage the properties and affairs of the Devaswoms, both incorporated and unincorporated and arrange for the conduct of the daily worship and ceremonies and of the festivals in every temple according to its usage. The position of the Board in regard to the Devaswoms - incorporated and unincorporated - is analogous to that of trustees. Any improper act of the trustees could be questioned by a worshipper. ## 10. In **A.A. Gopalakrishnan v. Cochin Devaswom Board** 6 DBA No.8 of 2024 **[(2007) 7 SCC 482]** a Three-Judge Bench of the Apex Court held that the properties of deities, temples and Devaswom Boards are required to be protected and safeguarded by their trustees/archakas/shebaits/ employees. Instances are many where the persons entrusted with the duty of managing and safeguarding the properties of temples, deities and Devaswom Boards have usurped and misappropriated such properties by setting up false claims of ownership, tenancy or adverse possession. This is possible only with the passive or active collusion of the authorities concerned. Such acts of ‘fence eating the crops’ should be dealt with sternly. The Government, members or trustees of boards/trusts, and devotees should be vigilant to prevent any such usurpation or encroachment. It is also the duty of courts to protect and safeguard the properties of religious and charitable institutions from wrongful claims or misappropriation. 11. In **Travancore Devaswom Board v. Mohanan Nair** **[2013 (3) KLT 132]** a Division Bench of this Court noticed that in **A.A. Gopalakrishnan [(2007) 7 SCC 482]** the Apex Court emphasised that it is the duty of the courts to protect and safeguard the interest and properties of the religious and charitable institutions. The relevant principles under the Hindu law 7 DBA No.8 of 2024 will show that the Deity is always treated similar to that of a minor, and there are some points of similarity between a minor and a Hindu idol. The High Court, therefore, is the guardian of the Deity, and apart from the jurisdiction under Section 103 of the Land Reforms Act, 1957, viz. the powers of revision, the High Court has inherent jurisdiction and the doctrine of _parens patriae_ will also apply in exercising the jurisdiction. 12. DBP No.2 of 2022 was registered suo motu, by the proceedings dated 31.01.2022, based on a news item that appeared in the Mathrubhumi online edition dated 30.01.2022 alleging huge corruption in the submission of fake food bills at Sabarimala Guest House. As per that news report, top officials are behind disbanding the Vigilance Wing of the Travancore Devaswom Board. The move was spearheaded by those fearing arrest if the fake bills submitted at Sabarimala Guest House and the irregularities in the toilet construction came out. Four officers, including two Sub Inspectors, were removed from the Vigilance Wing of the Travancore Devaswom Board. That DBP was disposed of by the order dated 14.02.2022 - **Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and others [2022 (2) KHC 411]** - by a Division Bench of this Court in which one among us [Anil K. Narendran, J.] was a party, 8 DBA No.8 of 2024 with the directions contained in paragraph 33 of that order. 13. In view of the law laid down in **Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and others [2022 (2) KHC 411]** the Travancore Devaswom Board is duty bound to ensure proper administration, supervision and control of Sabarimala, Pampa, Nilakkal and Erumeli Devaswoms, which are incorporated Devaswoms mentioned in Schedule I of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act. The Board has a statutory duty to monitor whether its administrative officials and employees and also the employees connected with religious rites are functioning properly. The Board is duty-bound to exercise proper supervision and control over the acts and proceedings of all officers and servants and to manage the properties and affairs of Sabarimala, Pampa, Nilakkal and Erumeli Devaswoms and conduct daily worships and ceremonies and also festivals in the temples under those Devaswoms according to its usage. The position of the Board in this regard is analogous to that of trustees, as held in **Ram Mohan Das [1975 KLT 55]** . Any improper act of the trustees could be questioned by a worshiper. 14. In view of the law laid down in **Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and others [2022 (2) KHC 411]** the Travancore 9 DBA No.8 of 2024 Devaswom Board and those entrusted with the duty of managing the properties and affairs of Sabarimala, Pamba, Nilakkal and Erumeli Devaswoms are duty bound to protect the properties of the deity from any wrongful claims, theft or misappropriation. Any such wrongful claims, theft or misappropriation with the passive or active collusion of the authorities concerned, which are acts of 'fence eating the crops' should be dealt with sternly. The deity being a perpetual minor, the High Court has inherent jurisdiction to protect and safeguard the interest and properties of the deity and the doctrine of _parens patriae_ will also apply in the exercise of such jurisdiction. 15. The Special Commissioner, Sabarimala filed SSCR No.11 of 2022, pursuant to the direction contained in the order of this Court in **Suo motu v. State of Kerala and others [2022** **(2) KHC 411]** . That SSCR was disposed of by the order dated 27.06.2023 **[Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and others** – **2023:KER:41764]** , wherein it was held that the recommendation made by the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer in the report dated 07.07.2022 to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the employee, which is one made based on Annexures I and II reports of the Vigilance Wing cannot be brushed aside by the Devaswom 10 DBA No.8 of 2024 Commissioner, who is the disciplinary authority, or by the Board, without stating cogent reasons. The Devaswom Commissioner, while submitting his report before the Board, and the Board, while passing orders based on the recommendation of the Devaswom Commissioner, has to state cogent reasons for brushing aside the recommendation of the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer. The order passed by the Board should reflect proper application of mind, which has to be manifest from the order itself. Paragraphs 20 to 23 of that order read thus; “20. As borne out from Annexures I and II reports of the Vigilance Wing, Karuppuswamy, the District Police Chief, Idukki, who stayed in the Guest House on 30.12.2021, had food from the police mess. However, as per the rough register maintained by Vishnu Prakash, Karuppuswamy had food at the Guest House. Similarly, as per the rough register, in November and December, 2021 and January, 2022, the Special Commissioner, Sabarimala, had food at the Guest House on days on which he had not even visited Sabarimala on account of court sittings in the Additional District Court, Kollam. Though the Special Commissioner was not at Sabarimala, the room earmarked for him functions as his office, in which his Secretary Balachandran Pillai and the Devaswom guard attached to that office will be present, and they are provided with food at the Guest House. In the enquiry conducted by the Vigilance Wing, it was revealed that Vishnu Prakash failed to maintain a proper register in the Guest House. Therefore, in the reports of the Vigilance Wing, it was recommended to take action against Vishnu Prakash. Based on Annexures I and II reports, the 5[th] respondent Chief Vigilance and Security Officer submitted report 11 DBA No.8 of 2024 No.PTN 08/22/TDB/VIG dated 07.07.2022 before the Board, wherein he has recommended initiation of disciplinary proceedings against Vishnu Prakash. The said recommendation made by the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer has been referred to in paragraph 2 of Annexure R3(a) order dated 30.01.2023. However, based on the recommendation made by the 4[th] respondent Devaswom Commissioner in his report No.ROC 16995/22/Est.-A dated 11.11.2022 to close the proceedings initiated against Vishnu Prakash giving strict warning, the Board has decided in Annexure R3(a) order to close the proceedings initiated against Vishnu Prakash by censuring him. 21. In view of the provisions under the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, the Travancore Devaswom Board has a statutory duty to monitor whether its administrative officials and employees and also the employees connected with religious rites are functioning properly. The Board is duty bound to exercise proper supervision and control over the acts and proceedings of all officers and servants and to manage the properties and affairs of Sabarimala Devaswom. The position of the Board in this regard is analogous to that of trustees. The recommendation made by the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer in the report dated 07.07.2022 to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the employee, which is one made based on Annexures I and II reports of the Vigilance Wing, cannot be brushed aside by the Devaswom Commissioner, who is the disciplinary authority, or by the Board, without stating cogent reasons. The Devaswom Commissioner, while submitting his report before the Board, and the Board, while passing orders based on the recommendation of the Devaswom Commissioner, has to state cogent reasons for brushing aside the recommendation of the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer. The order passed by the Board should reflect proper application of mind, which has to be manifest from the order itself. 22. The accounts of the Board are subjected to audit annually, as 12 DBA No.8 of 2024 per the requirements of Section 32 of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, by the auditors appointed by this Court under sub-section (3) of Section 32 of the Act. Maintaining a rough register for the Guest House during MandalaMakaravilakku festival season and entering the name of the guests in the accommodation register later, for the purpose of statutory audit, is a serious irregularity on the part of the employee who was in charge of the Guest House. The statutory audit of the annual accounts of the Travancore Devaswom Board for the years 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21 is pending on account of the delay on the part of the Board in furnishing the annual accounts, which was the subject matter in DBAR No.4 of 2022, which was disposed of by the order dated 24.05.2022, and DBAR No.8 of 2022, which was disposed of by the order dated 13.04.2023. It is for the additional 6[th] respondent Deputy Director, Kerala State Audit Department, Travancore Devaswom Board Audit to take note of the above aspects while conducting the statutory audit of the accounts of Sabarimala Devaswom for the year 1197 ME (2021-22). 23. In the above circumstances, this SSCR is disposed of by directing the 3[rd] respondent Travancore Devaswom Board to take a fresh decision on the recommendation made by the 5[th] respondent Chief Vigilance and Security Officer in his report No.PTN 08/22/TDB/VIG dated 07.07.2022, taking note of the law laid down hereinbefore at paragraph 21, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.” 16. In the decision in **Lalu G.R. v. State of Kerala and** **others [2023:KER:52344]** a Division Bench of this Court in which one among us [Anil K. Narendran, J.] was a party, was dealing with a writ petition in which the challenge was against an 13 DBA No.8 of 2024 order dated 10.08.2020 (Ext.P4 in that writ petition) of the Travancore Devaswom Board, whereby a decision has been taken to drop further investigation into the issue relating to the collection of funds by Thiruvithamcore Devaswom Employees Confederation, the 7[th] respondent therein, from the employees of the Travancore Devaswom Board as well as the contractors engaged by the Devaswom Board for its activities and utilising a portion of the said amount for purchasing land and building for the Employees Confederation at Nanthancode in Thiruvananthapuram. While setting aside the order dated 10.08.2020, the Division Bench held that the decision taken by the Travancore Devaswom Board in the said order to drop further investigation into the issue relating to the collection of funds by the Employees Confederation from the employees of the Board as well as the contractors engaged by the Board for its activities and utilising a portion of the said amount for purchasing land and building for the Employees Confederation at Nanthancode, brushing aside the report dated 10.05.2020 of the Vigilance Wing of the Board, cannot be sustained in law. Therefore, that writ petition was disposed of by setting aside the order dated 10.08.2020, and the Board was directed to reconsider the matter, 14 DBA No.8 of 2024 taking note of the recommendation made in the report dated 10.05.2020 of its Vigilance Wing, in the light of the law laid down by this Court in **Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and others [2023:KER:41764]** , with notice to the parties and after affording them an opportunity of being heard. 17. The Travancore Devaswom Board filed DBA No.5 of 2024 seeking permission to transfer the officers who are working at various posts at Sabarimala, Pamba, Nilakkal and Erumeli on completion of their tenure and post substitutes to their posts as per Annexure A1 Board order dated 22.06.2024. That DBA was disposed of by the order dated 05.07.2024 - **Travancore Devaswom Board v. Deputy Director, Kerala State Audit Department [2024 KHC OnLine 606 : 2024:KER:51448],** whereby this Court granted permission to the Travancore Devaswom Board for the transfer and posting of Sri.Murari Babu as the Executive officer, Sabarimala and Sri.P.R.Sreeshankar as the Administrative Officer, Erumeli Devaswom, who are serial Nos.1 and 5 in Annexure A1 Board order dated 22.06.2024. Insofar as officers who are serial Nos.2 to 4 and 6 in Annexure A1 Board order are concerned, Annexures A2 and A3 reports dated 15.06.2024 and 21.06.2024 of the Chief Vigilance and Security 15 DBA No.8 of 2024 Officer (Superintendent of Police), Travancore Devaswom Board contained adverse remarks against them. Since Annexure A1 Board order dated 22.06.2024 does not even refer to Annexure A2 and A3 reports of the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer, this Court directed the Board to take a fresh decision on the transfer and posting of the Assistant Executive Officer, Sabarimala and the Administrative Officers of Sabarimala, Pamba and Nilakkal Devaswoms after considering the reports of the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer and taking note of the law laid down by this Court in **Suo motu v. State of Kerala and others [2022 (2) KHC 411]** , **Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and others [2023:KER:41764]** and **Lalu G.R. v. State of Kerala and others [2023:KER:52344]** . Paragraphs 20 to 23 of the said order in DBA No.5 of 2024 read thus; “20. In the instant case, Annexures A2 and A3 reports dated 15.06.2024 and 21.06.2024 of the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer, Travancore Devaswom Board contain no adverse remarks against the officers, who are Serial Nos.1 and 6 in the list in paragraph 7 of the affidavit dated 26.06.2024 filed in support of this DBA, namely, Sri.B. Murari Babu, who is proposed to be transferred as the Executive Officer, Sabarimala and Sri.P.R. Sreeshankar, who is proposed to be transferred as the Administrative Officer, Erumeli Devaswom. Therefore, having considered the 16 DBA No.8 of 2024 pleadings and materials on record and the submissions made at the Bar, we deem it appropriate to grant permission to the Travancore Devaswom Board for the transfer and posting of Sri.B. Murari Babu as the Executive Officer, Sabarimala and Sri.P.R. Sreeshankar as the Administrative Officer, Erumeli Devaswom, who are Serial Nos.1 and 5 in Annexure A1 Board order dated 22.06.2024. Considering the urgency pointed out by the learned Standing Counsel, the Board is permitted to issue posting orders to the above two officers, with immediate effect. 21. In so far as the officers who are Serial Nos.2 to 5 in the list in paragraph 7 of the affidavit dated 26.06.2024 filed in support of this DBA are concerned, Annexures A2 and A3 reports dated 15.06.2024 and 21.06.2024 of the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer, Travancore Devaswom Board contain adverse remarks against them, who are Serial Nos.2 to 4 and 6 in Annexure A1 Board order dated 22.06.2024. The said Board order does not even refer to Annexures A2 and A3 reports dated 15.06.2024 and 21.06.2024 of the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer. 22. In the matter of transfer and posing of officers in Sabarimala, Pamba, Nilakkal and Erumeli, if the report of the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer contains adverse remarks, it cannot be brushed aside by the Travancore Devaswom Board, without stating cogent reasons. The orders passed by the Board, on the transfer and posting of officers in the said Devaswoms, shall contain cogent reasons for brushing aside the adverse remarks of the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer and such orders should reflect 17 DBA No.8 of 2024 proper application of mind, which should be manifest from that order itself. 23. In such circumstances, we deem it appropriate to direct the Travancore Devaswom Board to take a fresh decision on the transfer and posting of the Assistant Executive Officer, Sabarimala and the Administrative Officers of Sabarimala, Pampa and Nilakkal Devaswoms, after considering the reports of the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer and taking note of the law laid down by this Court in **Suo motu v. State of Kerala and others [2022** **(2) KHC 411]** , **Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and others [2023:KER:41764]** and **Lalu G.R. v. State of Kerala and others [2023:KER:52344]** . The decision taken by the Board shall be placed before this Court for approval, in terms of the direction contained in the order of this Court dated 01.08.2012 in DBAR No.16 of 2010.” 18. As held by this Court in **Travancore Devaswom** ## **Board v. Deputy Director, Kerala State Audit Department** **[2024 KHC OnLine 606]** , in the matter of transfer and posing of officers in Sabarimala, Pamba, Nilakkal and Erumeli, if the report of the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer contains adverse remarks, it cannot be brushed aside by the Travancore Devaswom Board, without stating cogent reasons. The orders passed by the Board, on the transfer and posting of officers in the said Devaswoms, shall contain cogent reasons for brushing aside the adverse remarks of the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer and 18 DBA No.8 of 2024 such orders should reflect proper application of mind, which should be manifest from that order itself. 19. The proposal made by the Travancore Devaswom Board in Annexure A1 order dated 22.06.2024 for the posting of officers (who are Serial Nos.I to IV in Annexure A5 order dated 09.07.2024) as Assistant Executive Officer, Sabarimala and Administrative Officers of Sabarimala Devaswom, Pamba Devaswom and Nilakkal Devaswom was directed to be reconsidered by the order dated 05.07.2024 in DBA No.5 of 2024 - **Travancore Devaswom Board v. Deputy Director, Kerala State Audit Department** **[2024 KHC OnLine 606]** – and the Board was directed to take a fresh decision on the transfer and posting of Assistant Executive Officer, Sabarimala and the Administrative Officers of Sabarimala Devaswom, Pamba Devaswom and Nilakkal Devaswom, after considering the reports of the Chief Vigilance and Security of Officer and taking note of the law laid down by this Court in the decisions referred to supra. 20. The officers, who are Serial Nos.II and III in Annexure A5 order dated 09.07.2024, are Sri.Biju V. Nath, Assistant Devaswom Commissioner, Ulloor Group, who is proposed to be posted as the Administrative Officer, Sabarimala Devaswom, and 19 DBA No.8 of 2024 Sri.V. Shibu, Special Grade Sub Group Officer, Chirakadavu Devaswom in Mundakayam Group, who is proposed to be posted as the Administrative Officer, Pamba Devaswom. In Annexure A5 order dated 09.07.2024, the Travancore Devaswom Board noticed that the only observations contained in Annexure A2 report dated 15.06.2024 of the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer (Superintendent of Police), against Sri.Biju V. Nath is that on a discrete enquiry, it is understood that he has financial interest and hence his posting in Sabarimala Devaswom may give room for complaints. The stand taken by the Board in Annexure A5 order, which is reiterated in paragraph 8 of the affidavit dated 10.07.2024 filed in support of this DBA is that the Board considered the observation made by the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer in Annexure A2 report and found that no proceedings are pending against him in respect of that allegation. No materials or evidence are with the Vigilance Wing in respect of that allegation. Therefore, the Board decided to seek permission of this Court to appoint Sri.Biju V. Nath as Administrative Officer, Sabarimala Devaswom. In the case of Sri.V. Shibu, the Board noticed in Annexure A5 order dated 09.07.2024 that the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him while he was 20 DBA No.8 of 2024 working as Strong Room Guard in Sabarimala was finalised in the year 2011 with censure. Thereafter, he was promoted to clerical cadre and worked in different offices. In Annexure A3 report dated 21.06.2024 of the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer, it is stated that after the disciplinary proceedings finalised in the year 2011, no disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against Sri.V. Shibu and that his administrative capacity in temples is satisfactory. Therefore, the Board decided in Annexure A5 order dated 09.07.2024 to seek permission of this Court to promote Sri.V. Shibu as the Administrative Officer, Pamba Devaswom. 21. Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and the submissions made at the Bar, we deem it appropriate to grant permission to the Travancore Devaswom Board for the transfer and posting of Sri.Biju V. Nath, who is Serial No.II in Annexure A5 order dated 09.07.2024, as the Administrative Officer, Sabarimala Devaswom and Sri.V. Shibu, who is Serial No.III in the said order as the Administrative Officer, Pamba Devaswom, as sought for in this DBA. 22. Insofar as the officer, who is Serial No.I in Annexure A5 order dated 09.07.2024 is concerned, we notice that as evident from Annexure A2 report dated 15.06.2024 of the Chief Vigilance 21 DBA No.8 of 2024 and Security Officer, a report dated 04.01.2024 has already been submitted before the Board for initiating disciplinary proceedings against the officer at Serial No.I, regarding shortage of Aravana at Sabarimala Sannidhanam during Mandala-Makaravilakku festival season of 1199 ME (2023-24). Annexure A5 order dated 09.07.2024 would show that based on that report of the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer, the officer at Serial No.I was issued with a show cause notice, to which he submitted an explanation, which was forwarded to the Board on 10.05.2024, along with the report of the Devaswom Commissioner. The original proposal made by the Board in Annexure A1 order dated 22.06.2024 to post that officer as Assistant Executive Officer, Sabarimala was made pending consideration of that explanation offered by the officer concerned. Now, in Annexure A5 order, for the purpose of posting that officer as Assistant Executive Officer, Sabarimala, the Board arrived at a conclusion that there was no wilful laches on his part in the shortage of Aravana during Mandala-Makaravilakku festival season of 1199 ME. Any such explanation offered by the employees concerned, requires consideration by the Board in an appropriate manner, in accordance with the procedure prescribed, after taking note of the recommendations made by the Chief 22 DBA No.8 of 2024 Vigilance and Security Officer and the report of the Devaswom Commissioner. The shortage of Aravana during MandalaMakaravilakku festival seasons of 1198 ME and 1199 ME was the subject matter in the reports filed by the Special Commissioner, Sabarimala, in which this Court has issued various directions, including direction to the Deputy Director, Kerala State Audit Department, Travancore Devaswom Board Audit to conduct statutory audit with specific reference to the irregularities in the tender process and the shortage in supply of composite cans for packing Aravana Prasadam by the successful bidders. In the above circumstances, we find that the approval for the appointment of the officer at Serial No.I in Annexure A5 order as Assistant Executive Officer, Sabarimala can only be declined and we do so. 23. Insofar as the officer, who is Serial No.IV in Annexure A5 order dated 09.07.2024 is concerned, we notice that as evident from Annexure A2 report dated 15.06.2024 of the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer, Report No.5/24/TDB/Vig dated 24.01.2024 of the Vigilance Wing made against the said officer while he was holding additional charge of Chettikulangara Devaswom and another Report No.7/24/TDB/Vig dated 01.02.2024 of the Vigilance Wing made against the very same officer while working 23 DBA No.8 of 2024 in Kandiyur Devaswom are still pending consideration before the Board. In Annexure A5 order dated 09.07.2024, the stand taken by the Board is that, after considering the observations of the Vigilance against the officer at Serial No.IV, there is lack of devotion from the side of the officer in the instances pointed out by the Vigilance. Since there is no wilful latches or financial misappropriation or other serious lapses on his side, the Board decided to seek permission of this Court for posting him as the Administrative Officer, Nilakkal Devaswom. A reading of Annexure A5 order would show that the explanation offered by the officer at Serial No.IV for undertaking the repair works of golden jeevitha in Chettikulangara Devaswom without the permission of the superior officers and the explanation offered by him for permitting a temporary employee to handle the Devaswom Registers of Kandiyur Devaswom are still pending consideration. Any such explanation offered by the employees concerned, requires consideration by the Board in an appropriate manner, in accordance with the procedure prescribed, after taking note of the recommendations made by the Chief Vigilance and Security Officer and the report of the Devaswom Commissioner. In the above circumstances, we find that the approval for the appointment of 24 DBA No.8 of 2024 the officer at Serial No.IV in Annexure A5 order as the Administrative Officer, Nilakkal Devaswom can only be declined and we do so. In the result, this DBA is disposed of with the above directions. It is for the Travancore Devaswom Board to make a fresh proposal for appointment to the posts of Assistant Executive Officer, Sabarimala and Administrative Officer, Nilakkal Devaswom. Sd/- **ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE** Sd/- **HARISANKAR V. MENON, JUDGE** ln 25 DBA No.8 of 2024 ## **`APPENDIX OF DBA 8/2024`** ## **`PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES:`** ``` ANNEXURE A1 ``` ``` TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER VIDE ROC NO.5600/24/EST-1 DATED 22.06.2024 ISSUED BY TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD REGARDING THE PROPOSAL FOR POSTING OFFICERS IN SABARIMALA, PAMPA, NILAKKAL AND ERUMELI FOR OBTAINING APPROVAL FROM THIS HON'BLE COURT. ``` ``` ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT NO. CT. 178/24/TDB/VIG DATED 15.06.2024 PREPARED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, VIGILANCE & SECURITY WING, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD. ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT NO. CT. 178/24/TDB/VIG DATED 21.06.2024 PREPARED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, VIGILANCE & SECURITY WING, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD. ANNEXURE A4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT NO. CT. 217/24/TDB/VIG DATED 04.07.2024 PREPARED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, VIGILANCE & SECURITY WING, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD. ANNEXURE A5 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS VIDE ROC NO.5600/24/EST-1 DATED 09.07.2024 ISSUED BY TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD. ```