Kerala High Court
Vishnu Prasad S vs Travancore Devaswom Board on 19 November, 2019
Author: P.V.Asha
Bench: P.V.Asha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA
TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 28TH KARTHIKA, 1941
WP(C).No.19347 OF 2015(P)
PETITIONER/S:
1 VISHNU PRASAD S.
S/O.SANKARAN MOOSAD, KIZHAKKEDATHU ILLOM,
KIZHAKKENADA, VAIKOM P.O.,
VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
2 KRISHNAKUMAR N.
VADAKKE WARRIAM, AARPPUKARA (E)PO, KOTTAYAM-8.
3 RAMESHAN O.N.
OLIKKARA ILLOM, THURAVOOR P.O., CHERTHALA.
4 ANILKUMAR P.
THEKKEDATHU ILLOM, MALLAPUZHASSERI,
ARANMULA P.O,PATHANAMTHITTA.
5 HARI NARAYANAN S.
CHITTEZHATHU ILLOM, ETTUMANOOR P.O., KOTTAYAM.
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY
SRI.P.KRISHNANKUTTY NAIR (KOLLAMALA)
RESPONDENT/S:
1 TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
NANTHANCODE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2 DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER
TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
R1 BY SRI.C.K.PAVITHRAN, SC, TDB
R1 BY SRI.T.K.AJITH KUMAR, SC, TDB
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
19.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2
W.P.(C) 19347/2015
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 19th day of November 2019 The petitioners who are working as Karazhma Kaisthanis in 5 different temples under the Travancore Devasom Board filed this Writ Petition challenging Ext. P2 order by which the respondent Board has ordered that they would be engaged for special duty at Sabarimala and for other special duties for which they would be given special allowances. Petitioners' claim that Karazhma employees are not transferable and they cannot spare the duties attached to their temples. It is stated that, their duties commence at 4.30 AM with the opening of the Sree Kovil which would be followed by Ezhunellippu, lighting of Deepam in the Sopanam, clearing of Vazhipad items in the Sopanam, Padmam, etc. From morning till evening their presence in the temple is highly essential and those duties cannot be entrusted to anybody else.
2. It is also pointed out that the rituals in each of the temples would be different depending upon the dieties. Therefore the contention of the petitioners' is that they are liable to be exempted from the special duties. It is also pointed out that there would not be even sufficient 3 W.P.(C) 19347/2015 number of members in their family for substituting them. It is also pointed out that it would not be possible to arrange substitutes for a continuous period of 70 days.
3. The petitioners' rely on Ext.P1 statement filed before the Ombudsman, in which Board had stated that, Karazhma employees working in temples under the Board stand on a different footing with respect to their method of appointment as well as conditions of service and that they cannot be shifted from Karazhma post.
4. The respondent Board has filed a counter affidavit stating that even though Karazhma employees are not holding transferable posts, it is upto the Board to depute them for special duties especially when there is shortage of Shanthis at Sabarimala. It is stated that Board has got absolute control over holders of all Karazhma services. According to them, in view of the disciplinary control on all the employees including Karazhma employees, the Board is entitled to utilize the service of Karazhma employees in any of the temples in the best interest of the Board. Therefore it is stated that allotting work at Sabarimala is not a transfer and it is only a Special duty arrangement for a maximum period of 65 days in order to make good the shortage of 4 W.P.(C) 19347/2015 manpower during the Makaravilaku Festival.
5. The respondents have stated that there is no prohibition for utilising the services of Karazhma employees in Sabarimala on special occasions and that too for a short period. It is stated that, services of these employees would be arranged, without disturbing the functioning of their temples. According to them, the income from Sabarimala is a major source for the Devasom Board from which the temples incapable of maintaining with their own income, can be maintained and in the absence of sufficient number of persons at Sabarimala, there is likelihood of reduction in the income.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argues that, in view of the very nature of Karazhma system, shifting the Karazhma employees even on special occasions is not envisaged.
7. Having heard the contentions, I am of the view that there is no prohibition against special duty arrangement of Karazhma Kaisthanis provided the Devasom Board ensures that there is no hindrance to the function of the respective temples. The Board shall also consider whether special duty arrangement is necessary for the 5 W.P.(C) 19347/2015 entire 65 days which is likely to cause difficulties in arranging substitutes.
8. Therefore the second respondent shall ensure that no hindrance is caused to the functioning of the respective temples where persons like petitioners are working while engaging them on special duty and shall also see that the continuous engagement for the entire 65 days is not made.
P.V.ASHA JUDGE SM 6 W.P.(C) 19347/2015 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HON'BLE OMBUDSMAN FOR TRAVANCORE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD.
EXHIBIT P2 P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE BOARD'S DECISION PASSED AS DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS DATED 17-5-2015