W.P.(C) Nos.21775 of 2022 & 26133 of 2022 (Geetha U.V. and Abhilash Kalathil v. Malabar Devaswom Board)

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT** # **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR** **TUESDAY, THE 28[TH] DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 9TH PHALGUNA, 1944 W.P.(C) NO. 21775 OF 2022** ## **PETITIONER:** **U.V. GEETHA AGED 54 YEARS, WIFE OF GOPI N., TYPIST CUM CLERK, SREE PISHARIKKAVU DEVASWOM, KOLLAM, QUILANDY, KOZHIKODE, RESIDING AT NANOTH HOUSE, KOLLAM, VIYYUR, KERALA, KOZHIKODE RURAL, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, INDIA.** **BY ADVS. K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.) T.RAMPRASAD UNNI S.M.PRASANTH G.RENJITH R.S.ASWINI SANKAR T.H.ARAVIND** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, ERANHIPALAM, KOZHIKODE - 673 006.** - **2 THE COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, ERANHIPALAM, KOZHIKODE - 673 006.** - **3 THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, PISHARIKKAVU DEVASWOM, KOLLAM, KOYILANDY,** 2 W.P.(C) Nos.21775 of 2022 & 26133 of 2022 ## **KOZHIKODE DISTRICT - 673 305.** - **4 THE TRUSTEE BOARD OF THE PISHARIKKAVU DEVASWOM, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, PISHARIKKAVU DEVASWOM, KOLLAM P.O., KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673006.** - **5 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF DEVASWOM, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.** - **6* A.T. VIKAS, ADVOCATE, DARSHANA, ARAVIND GOSH ROAD, CALICUT – 673 032.** - **7* BALAN NAIR K.** - **S/O RAMUNNI NAIR, CHAIRMAN OF THE PISHARIKAVU DEVASWOM, RESIDING AT KOTTILAKATH HOUSE, KOLLAM, VIYYUR, KOZHIKODE RULAL, KERALA, INDIA – 673 305.** - ***ADDL.R6 & R7 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED** - **08.02.2023 IN I.A.NO.1 OF 2022. BY ADVS.** - **R1 AND R2 BY SRI R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN, STANDING COUNSEL, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD R3 AND R4 BY SMT.ANJALI MENON** - **R5 BY SRI.RAJMOHAN S., SR.GOVENRMENT PLEADER.** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 08.02.2023, ALONG WITH WP(C).26133/2022, THE COURT ON 28.02.2023 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** 3 W.P.(C) Nos.21775 of 2022 & 26133 of 2022 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN** ## **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR** **TUESDAY, THE 28[TH] DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 9TH PHALGUNA, 1944 W.P.(C) NO. 26133 OF 2022** ## **PETITIONER:** **ABHILASH KALATHIL** **AGED 39 YEARS S/O.ACHUTHAN, KALATHIL HOUSE, KOLLAM P.O., KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673 307.** **BY ADVS. I.SHEELA DEVI PRADEEP BABU P.D.** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HOUSEFED COMPLEX, ERANJIPALAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673006.** - **2 THE COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, HOUSEFED COMPLEX, ERANJIPALAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673006.** - **3 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, HOUSEFED COMPLEX, ERANJIPALAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673006.** - **4 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, HOUSEFED COMPLEX, ERANJIPALAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673006.** 4 W.P.(C) Nos.21775 of 2022 & 26133 of 2022 - **5 BOARD OF TRUSTEES, SREE PISHARIKAVU TEMPLE, KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673307, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.** - **6 THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SREE PISHARIKAVU TEMPLE, KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN -673307.** - **7 GEETHA U.V. (UNDER SUSPENSION), L.D.CLERK, SREE PISHARIKAVU TEMPLE, KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673307.** **BY ADVS.** **R1 TO R4 BY SRI R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN, STANDING COUNSEL, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD R5 & R6 BY P.ANIRUDHAN** **R7 BY K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.)** **T.RAMPRASAD UNNI** - **S.M.PRASANTH** **R.S.ASWINI SANKAR** **T.H.ARAVIND** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 08.02.2023, ALONG WITH WP(C).21775/2022, THE COURT ON 28.02.2023 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** 5 W.P.(C) Nos.21775 of 2022 & 26133 of 2022 ## **JUDGMENT** ## P.G. Ajithkumar, J. Smt.Geetha U.V. was a Typist-cum-Clerk in the Sree Pisharikavu Devaswom, which is a controlled institution under the Malabar Devaswom Board. There arose an allegation that on 18.03.2021 during counting of Bandaram in the Temple, she had stolen money by concealing currency notes inside her blouse and saree. On the basis of that allegation, a disciplinary proceedings was initiated against her by the Malabar Devaswom Board. In the wake of that allegation, she was placed under suspension with effect from 25.03.2021. Advocate N.Chandrasekharan, Quilandy was appointed as Enquiry Officer for enquiring into the allegations against her. He has submitted a report dated 09.05.2022. The Malabar Devaswom Board did not accept the said report, instead another enquiry was ordered and Advocate V.T.Vikas was appointed as Enquiry Officer. 2. In the aforesaid factual settings, Sri.Abhilash Kalathil claiming to be a devotee of Sree Pisharikavu Temple 6 W.P.(C) Nos.21775 of 2022 & 26133 of 2022 filed W.P.(C) No.26133 of 2022 seeking the following reliefs: - “i) to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction compelling the respondents 1 to 5 to not to reinstate the 7th respondent into service; - ii) to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents 1 to 5 to conduct a fresh enquiry by verifying the CCTV footage and all other evidence.” 3. In W.P.(C) No.26133 of 2022, the learned Standing Counsel for the Malabar Devaswom Board took notice for respondent Nos.1 to 4. Respondent Nos.5 to 7 entered appearance pursuant to notice. 4. Smt.U.V.Geetha filed W.P.(C) No.21775 of 2022 alleging that by retaining her under suspension for such a long period that too, inspite of submission of Ext.P1 report by Advocate N.Chandrasekharan, the Enquiry Officer, exonerating her from all the charges, is violative of Articles 14, 16, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. She seeks the following reliefs,- - “i) To issue a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 4 to immediately reinstate the petitioner back in service as Typist-cum-Clerk under the fourth respondent Devaswom, 7 W.P.(C) Nos.21775 of 2022 & 26133 of 2022 which is functioning under respondents 1 to 3 with all attendant benefits, forthwith; - i(a) To declare that the second enquiry proposed to be conducted evidenced by Exts. P5 and P7 is wholly without jurisdiction, void and violative of the fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed to her under Articles 14, 16, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and set it aside; - i(b) To issue a writ of mandamus forbearing the respondents from conducting a second domestic enquiry pursuant to Exts.P5 and P7 since the matter has already been thoroughly enquired in an earlier domestic enquiry and found in favour of the petitioner; - ii) To declare that the denial to reinstate the petitioner back in service in spite of the completion of disciplinary proceedings is illegal and violative of Articles 14, 16, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.” 5. When W.P.(C) No.21776 of 2022 came up for consideration before a learned Single Judge, the petitioner filed I.A.No.1 of 2022 seeking leave to amend the Writ Petition. That application was allowed as per order dated 21.11.2022. The learned Single Judge finding that W.P.(C) No.26133 of 2022 relates to the same subject matter, directed to list this Writ Petition before us. The petitioner submitted a memorandum of amended Writ Petition. 8 W.P.(C) Nos.21775 of 2022 & 26133 of 2022 6. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.26133 of 2022, the learned Senior Counsel appearing on instructions for the petitioner in W.P.(C) No21775 of 2022, who is the 7th respondent in W.P.(C) No.26133 of 2022, the learned Standing Counsel for the Malabar Devaswom Board, the learned Senior Government Pleader and also the learned counsel appearing for the party respondents. 7. The second relief claimed in W.P.(C) No.26133 of 2022 is a writ of mandamus directing the Malabar Devaswom Board to conduct a fresh enquiry into the allegations against Smt.Geetha U.V. after verifying the CCTV footage and all other evidence. Indisputedly, in the light of the complaint that Smt.Geetha U.V. removed money from Hundi collection in Sree Pisharikavu Temple during the course of counting, a disciplinary proceedings was initiated against her and an enquiry was conducted. Smt.Geetha U.V. was placed under suspension with effect from 25.03.2021 and is still under suspension. It is also beyond dispute that the Enquiry Officer, 9 W.P.(C) Nos.21775 of 2022 & 26133 of 2022 Advocate N.Chandrasekharan submitted a report finding Smt.Geetha U.V. not guilty of the charges levelled against her. 8. Now the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.26133 of 2022 wants to conduct a second enquiry against Smt.Geetha U.V. and CCTV footages, which covered the process of counting during the relevant time and also other relevant materials should be taken into consideration in such enquiry. As could be seen from Exts.P5, P6 and P7 produced in W.P.(C) No.21775 of 2022, a second enquiry was initiated against Smt.Geetha U.V. and Advocate V.T.Vikas, a lawyer of Calicut Bar was appointed as the Enquiry Officer. What shall be the nature of enquiry is a prerogative of the Enquiry Officer. Of course, it is his obligation to conduct enquiry in a meaningful manner and following the principles of natural justice. No direction regarding the manner in which the enquiry shall be conducted can be ordered in exercise of the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In such circumstances, the second relief claimed in W.P.(C) No.26133 of 2022 can only to be declined. 10 W.P.(C) Nos.21775 of 2022 & 26133 of 2022 9. The first relief in W.P.(C) No.26133 of 2022 pertaining to the powers of the respondent Nos.1 to 5 as employer of Smt.Geetha U.V. Whether an employee would be reinstated or not is a dispute concerning conditions of service of that employee. The Apex Court in **Hari Bansh Lal v. Sahodar Parasad Mahto and others [(2010) 9 SCC 655]** held that except for writ of quo-warranto, a public interest litigation is not maintainable in service matters. A Division Bench of this Court in **Jaleel P.P. v. P.K.Muralikrishnan and others [2014 (1) KHC 672]** followed the said view. It was further held that in service matters, a third party having no concern with the case at hand, cannot claim to have any locus standi to raise any grievance whatsoever, especially in Public interest litigation. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.26133 of 2022 does not spell out any personal interest in the matter. He as a devotee of the Pisharikavu Temple filed this Writ Petition. In that view of the matter, he is a stranger to the lis and the law laid down in the aforesaid decisions forbear this Court from issuing a writ of mandamus as claimed by the 11 W.P.(C) Nos.21775 of 2022 & 26133 of 2022 petitioner in the first relief. Hence, we are of the view that W.P.(C) No.26133 of 2022 is liable only to be dismissed. 10. The learned Senior Counsel appeared for the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.21775 of 2022 would submit that having conducted a full fledged enquiry and found the petitioner not guilty of the charges, another enquiry on the same set of allegations is illegal. The learned Senior Counsel invited our attention to Ext.P2. It is the order of this Court in Crl.M.C.No.3801 of 2022. It is contended that the frivolous nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner Smt.Geetha U.V. was fully convinced by this Court and therefore further proceedings in Crime No.369 of 2022 of Quilandy Police Station was stayed as per Exst.P2 order. That crime was registered against the petitioner relating to the alleged misappropriation of money. It is pointed out that such a crime was registered after finding the petitioner not guilty of the charges, in the disciplinary enquiry. On the basis of a totally false complaint such a crime was registered and that fact was accepted by this Court in Crl.M.C.No.3081 of 2022. 12 W.P.(C) Nos.21775 of 2022 & 26133 of 2022 For that reason and also by contending that a second disciplinary enquiry is legally impermissible, the learned Senior Counsel would canvass for a relief quashing the proceedings in the disciplinary enquiry and direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service. 11. The report submitted by the first Enquiry Officer Advocate N.Chandrasekharan was not accepted by the employer. As could be seen from Ext.P5, the employer took the view that the said report was incomplete and unsatisfactory, and consequently a second enquiry was ordered. The disciplinary authority always has the prerogative to accept or reject a report submitted by an Enquiry Officer. A report of an enquiry officer is not binding on the disciplinary authority. The learned Senior Counsel did not point out any provision of law making a second enquiry, in the circumstances obtained in this case, illegal. In such circumstances, we are of the view that the second enquiry ordered to be conducted against Smt.Geetha U.V. cannot be quashed at this stage. However, the grievance of the 13 W.P.(C) Nos.21775 of 2022 & 26133 of 2022 petitioner, Smt.Geetha U.V. that she has been kept under suspension since 25.03.2021 under the guise of the disciplinary enquiry is anguishing. In such circumstances, respondents in W.P.(C) No.21775 of 2022 are obliged to complete the enquiry in a time bound manner. Accordingly, i) W.P.(C) No.26133 of 2022 is dismissed; and ii) W.P.(C) No.21775 of 2022 is disposed of by directing the respondents to complete the whole process of disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner Smt.Geetha U.V. within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment. **Sd/ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE** **Sd/P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE** dkr 14 W.P.(C) Nos.21775 of 2022 & 26133 of 2022 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21775/2022** ## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF ENQUIRY REPORT DATED 09..05..2022 SUBMITTED BY THE OFFICER ALONG WITH A COVERING LETTER NO. P.D.20/21 DATED 18..05..2022 OF R3 SENT PETITIONER** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 16..06..2022 IN CRL. M.A. NO. 1 OF 2022 IN CRL.M.C. NO. 3801 OF 2022** **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DT. 30..05..2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R3. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. P.D. 153/10 10.07.2017 ISSUED BY R3 TO THE PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DT. 13.10.2022 SENT BY ADDL. R6 TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF REPLY DT. 22.10.2022 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO ADDL. R6.** **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO. P.D. 66/22 SENT BY R3 TO ADDL. R6.** 15 W.P.(C) Nos.21775 of 2022 & 26133 of 2022 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26133/2022** ## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS** - **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26.03.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P2** - **TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.A2944/2021/MDB/4141/15.09.21 DATED FORWARDED TO 2ND RESPONDENT BY 4TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 10.05.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P4** - **TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12.05.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM APPEARED IN SOCIAL MEDIA IN RESPECT OF RENTING OUT ELEPHANT IN PISHARIKKAVU KALIPYATTAM.** - **EXHIBIT P6** - **TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 11.03.2022 EXECUTED BY THE OWNER OF THE ELEPHANT AND EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE SREE PISHARIKKAVU TEMPLE.**