High Court of KeralaDivision Bench2022-07-12Closed (DBA 14/2021)

Travancore Devaswom Board v. Deputy Examiner for Local Fund Audit, Kerala State Audit Department, Travancore Devaswom Board Audit

Case / Petition Number:DBA NO. 14 OF 2021

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: Anil K. Narendran
M.R. Anitha
Judgment Date: 2022-07-12
Court Decision / Holding: DBA 14 of 2021 is closed; the Board’s decision in ROC No.3507/16/Est-I dated 27.06.2022 concluding no need to create permanent posts formed the basis for closing the DBA.
Final Disposition: Closed (DBA 14/2021)

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Travancore Devaswom Board

Respondents

Deputy Examiner for Local Fund Audit, Kerala State Audit Department, Travancore Devaswom Board Audit

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Shri G. Biju, SC, Travancore Devaswom Board

Counsels for Respondents

• Sri S. Rajmohan, Sr. Government Pleader

Case Synopsis & Summary

This Division Bench of the High Court of Kerala adjudicated an application by the Travancore Devaswom Board seeking extension of the term of appointment of Sri Nidheesh Sundar as Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) at the Appam Aravana Preparation Plant, Sabarimala, for a further period of one year from 17.09.2021 on the existing terms and conditions. The matter has a procedural history: an interim order on 09.11.2021 granted four months extension; the Respondent filed a statement dated 25.03.2022 highlighting the indispensability of the employee for supervision of machineries and noting the contract’s expiry on 16.04.2021. The Board justified extending the contract period citing recommendations and the Chief Engineer’s report; it noted that there has been no regular recruitment since 2017 and that the workforce has relied on contract appointments. The Deputy Examiner for Local Fund Audit contended that there is no necessity to create a permanent post, supported by ROC No.3507/16/Est-I dated 27.06.2022. The bench referred to State of Haryana v. Piara Singh to illustrate that ad hoc or temporary appointments may be permissible in exigencies of administration but must be replaced by regular appointments as soon as possible, with fair recruitment processes. On 27.06.2022, the Board decided there was no need to create permanent posts, and this DBA was closed in light of that decision.

Provisions of Law Cited

Article 16 of the Constitution of India

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Exigencies of administration may require ad hoc or temporary appointments.
An ad hoc or temporary employee should ordinarily be replaced by a regularly selected employee as early as possible; further, an ad hoc appointment should not be used to withhold regular appointment.
If an ad hoc appointment is necessitated, it should preferably be drawn from the employment exchange, and where not possible, a notice calling for applications should be published and all applicants fairly considered under Article 16.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The Travancore Devaswom Board sought extension of the contract period for Sri Nidheesh Sundar as Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) at the Sabarimala Aravana Plant, arguing that the plant’s complex machinery and ongoing operations require the incumbent’s supervision, and that there has been no regular recruitment since 2017 despite interim extensions. The Board referenced the 2017 order and annexures showing long service and maintained that permanent recruitment or a vacancy notification would undermine operations. It contended the Board’s decision to request a one-year extension was guided by operational necessity and prior recommendations (A5/A6).

Contentions of Respondents

The Deputy Examiner for Local Fund Audit contended that there is no necessity to create a permanent post in light of ROC No.3507/16/Est-I dated 27.06.2022, indicating no permanent vacancies; it emphasized adherence to regular recruitment norms and the lack of post-creation on a permanent basis. The respondent argued that ad hoc extensions should not erode the recruitment process and that proper vacancy notifications and fair competition are required.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
State of Haryana v. Piara Singh	[(1992) 4 SCC 118]	Positive	The judgment cites Piara Singh to articulate that regular recruitment is the norm, but exigencies may justify ad hoc/temporary appointments, provided these are replaced by regular appointments as soon as possible and through a fair recruitment process.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Travancore Devaswom Board v. Deputy Examiner for Local Fund Audit, Kerala State Audit Department, Travancore Devaswom Board Audit and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN ``` ``` & ``` ``` THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 12[TH] DAY OF JULY 2022 / 21ST ASHADHA, 1944 ``` ``` DBA NO. 14 OF 2021 ``` ``` IN THE MATTER OF TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD SEEKING PERMISSION TO EXTEND THE TERM OF CONTRACT PERIOD OF ASSISTANT ENGINEER (MECHANICAL) ``` ## **`APPLICANT:`** ``` TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. ``` ``` BY ADV SHRI.G.BIJU,SC,TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD ``` ## **`RESPONDENT:`** ``` DEPUTY EXAMINER FOR LOCAL FUND AUDIT KERALA STATE AUDIT DEPARTMENT, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD AUDIT, NANTHENCODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 033. ``` ``` SRI S. RAJMOHAN- SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER ``` ``` THIS DEVASWOM BOARD APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` -2- DBA NO.14 OF 2021 ## **ORDER** Anil K. Narendran, J. This is an application filed by the Travancore Devaswom Board seeking extension of the term of appointment of Sri.Nidheesh Sundar as Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) in Appam Aravana Preparation Plant at Sabarimala, for a further period of one year from 17.09.2021, in the existing terms and conditions. 2. On 09.11.2021, when this application came up for consideration, the learned Senior Government Pleader sought three weeks’ time to file statement. This Court granted an interim order extending the term of appointment of Sri.Nidheesh Sundar as Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) in Appam Aravana Preparation Plant at Sabarimala, for a period of four months from 17.09.2021, in the existing terms and conditions. 3. The respondent Deputy Director for Local Fund Audit has filed a statement dated 25.03.2022, wherein it is stated that, the Executive Engineer, Sabarimala Development Project, Pathanamthitta, vide Annexure A4/1 letter dated 25.06.2021 requested for the extension of the contract period of the employee as it is reported by the Assistant Engineer, Sabarimala -3- DBA NO.14 OF 2021 that the service of the employee is inevitable for the proper supervision of various machineries installed for the preparation of all vazhipadu items, conveyors, steam and thermic fluid boilers, generators, diesel tank, pumps, lifts, etc. The incumbent has also applied for an extension of his contract of appointment, vide Annexure A4/2 letter dated 15.06.2021, as the term of his contract of appointment expired on 16.04.2021. The Board, on Annexure A5 recommendation dated 30.06.2021 of the Chief Engineer (General), decided vide Annexure A6 order dated 16.08.2021 to move this Court for getting permission to appoint the incumbent on contract basis for a further period of one year from 17.09.2021. By the interim order dated 09.11.2021, this Court granted extension for a period of 4 months from 17.09.2021. On the prayer sought for in this DBA to extend the term of the appointment of Sri.Nidheesh Sundar for a further period of 1 year from 17.09.2021, the respondent has pointed out that, the said employee is continuing in the post from 2017 onwards, as revealed from Annexure A1 order of this Court dated 30.10.2017 in D.B.A.No.17 of 2017. The Board has not initiated any steps to engage regular hands, instead of extending the contract period of the employee. There is no subsequent -4- ## DBA NO.14 OF 2021 selection after 2017, which is against the established principles of service law in the case of public employment. The Board has either go for a permanent selection through the Devaswom Recruitment Board or to notify the vacancy so as to enable other similarly situated persons to compete for the post. 4. On 31.05.2022, the applicant was directed to file reply affidavit, if any, to the statement filed by the respondent, within one week. The learned Standing Counsel for the Travancore Devaswom Board was directed to get instructions as to the details of persons in charge of maintenance and upkeep of Aravana Plant at Sabarimala, other than Assistant Engineer (Mechanical). 4. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board for the applicant and also the learned Senior Government Pleader for the respondent Deputy Examiner for Local Fund Audit. 5. In **State of Haryana v. Piara Singh [(1992) 4 SCC 118]** the Apex Court held that, the normal rule, is regular recruitment through the prescribed agency but exigencies of administration may sometimes call for an ad hoc or temporary appointment to be made. In such a situation, effort should -5- DBA NO.14 OF 2021 always be to replace such an ad hoc/temporary employee by a regularly selected employee as early as possible. Such a temporary employee may also compete along with others for such regular selection/appointment. If he gets selected, well and good, but if he does not, he must give way to the regularly selected candidate. The appointment of the regularly selected candidate. The appointment of the regularly selected candidate cannot be withheld or kept in abeyance for the sake of such an ad hoc/temporary employee. Secondly, an ad hoc or temporary employee should not be replaced by another ad hoc or temporary employee; he must be replaced only by a regularly selected employee. This is necessary to avoid arbitrary action on the part of the appointing authority. Thirdly, even where an ad hoc or temporary employment is necessitated on account of the exigencies of administration, he should ordinarily be drawn from the employment exchange unless it cannot brook delay in which case the pressing cause must be stated on the file. If no candidate is available or is not sponsored by the employment exchange, some appropriate method consistent with the requirements of Article 16 of the Constitution of India should be followed. In other words, there must be a notice published in the -6- DBA NO.14 OF 2021 appropriate manner calling for applications and all those who apply in response thereto should be considered fairly. 6. During the course of arguments, the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board has made available for the perusal of this Court a copy of the order No.ROC 3507/16/Est-I dated 27.06.2022, whereby it is decided that there is no necessity to create permanent post of Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) and Mechanical Assistant in the Aravana Preparation Plant at Sabarimala. The relevant portion of the dated 27.06.2022 reads thus; “ശബരിമല അരവണ ്ഺാന്റിന്ററ പ്രവർ്ᩈന്ങൾ്ᨪ് അസി്ഹന്റ് എ്ᨸിനീയർ (റമ്ᨪാനി്ᨪൽ), റമ്ᨪാനി്ᨪൽ അസി്ഹന്റ് തസ്തികകൾ ്ഽിരമായി സൃ് ്ക്ᨪ്ᩂ സാഹചരയം ഇ്ᩤാറയ്ര് തീരുമാനിച്ും ടി വിവരം ബഹു: ഹഹ്ക്ᨪാടതിയിൽ സമർ്പി്ᨪു്രതിന് നിയമ വിഭാഗറ്ᩈ ചുമതലറ്പടു്ᩈിയും . ഉ്ᩈരവാകു്രു അ്കതാറടാ്പം നിലവിൽ അസി്ഹന്റ് എ്ᨸിനീയർ (റമ്ᨪാനി്ᨪൽ), റമ്ᨪാനി്ᨪൽ അസി്ഹന്റ് തസ്തികകളിൽ ് ാൺപ്ടാക അടി്ഽാന്ᩈിൽ നിയമിച്ി്ᨾുളളവരുറട ്കസവനം . ദീർഘി്പി്ക്ᨪ്ᩂതി്ᩤാ റയ്ര് തീരുമാനിച്ും ഉ്ᩈരവാകു്രു ടി ്ഺാന്റിന്ററ പ്രവർ്ᩈന്ങൾ്ᨪ് ദിവസ്കവതന/കരാർ അടി്ഽാന്ᩈിൽ റമ്ᨪാനി്ᨪൽ അസി്ഹന്റിറന നി്കയാഗി്ക്ᨪ്ᩂതുറ്ᩂ്ഝിൽ ആയത് സംബ്യിച ്കദവസവം അ്ᨪൗ്ᩂ്സ് ആഫീസറുറട റിമാർᨪ᪚സ് കൂടി രരിഗണിച ഉചിതമായ റപ്രാ്ക്പാസൽ സമർ്പി്ᨪു്രതിന് ചീഫ് .” എ്ᨸിനീയററ ചുമതലറ്പടു്ᩈിയും ്കബാർഡ് ഉ്ᩈരവാകു്രു 6. By the interim order dated 09.11.2021, this Court -7- DBA NO.14 OF 2021 extended the term of appointment of Sri.Nidheesh Sundar as Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) in Appam Aravana Preparation Plant at Sabarimala, for a period of four months from 17.09.2021, in the existing terms and conditions. Thereafter, no further extension was granted. In view of the decision taken by the Board in order No.ROC 3507/16/Est-I dated 27.06.2022, this DBA is closed. Sd/- ## **ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE** Sd/- **M.R. ANITHA, JUDGE** AV -8- DBA NO.14 OF 2021 ## **`APPENDIX OF DBA 14/2021`** ## **`PETITIONER ANNEXURES`** |**`Annexure A1`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30/10/2017`**| |---|---| ||**`IN DBA 17/2017 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.`**| |**`Annexure A2`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05/08/2019`**| ||**`IN DBA 08/2019 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.`**| |**`Annexure A3`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE BOARD ORDER NO.ROC.`**| ||**`3507/16/EST-1 DTD. 4/9/2019 APPOINTING`**| ||**`SRI.T.K.NIDHEESH`** **`SUNDAR`** **`ON`** **`CONTRACT`**| ||**`BASIS.`**| |**`Annexure A4`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 25/06/2021`**| ||**`OF`** **`EXECUTIVE`** **`ENGINEER,`** **`SABARIMALA`**| ||**`DEVELOPMENT PROJECT.`**| |**`Annexure A5`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF CHIEF`**| ||**`ENGINEER (GENERAL) DATED 30/06/2021.`**| |**`Annexure A6`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE BOARD DECISION, ROC`**| ||**`NO.3507/16/EST-1 DTD. 16/08/2021.`**|