Kerala High Court
S.Jayakumar vs Travancore Devaswom Board on 3 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 14TH MAGHA,1942
WP(C).No.3454 OF 2019(F)
PETITIONERS:
1 S.JAYAKUMAR
AGED 59 YEARS
S/O.GOVINDA PILLAI,
RESIDING AT SHANTI NIVAS, MAZHUKKIR,
KALLISHERRY.P.O., CHENGUNNUR,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-689124.
*ADDL JAYASREE
P2 AGED 49 YEARS, W/O LATE JAYAKUMAR,
RESIDING AT SHANTI NIVAS MAZHUKKIR,
KALLISHERRY P.O.,
CHENGUNNU ALAPPUZHA DISRTRICT
*ADDL KARTHIK J., AGED 29 YEARS,
P3 LATE JAYAKUMAR,
RESIDING AT SHANTI NIVAS,
MAZHUKKIR, KALLISHERRY PO,
CHENGUNNU ALAPPUZHA DISRTRICT, PI-68912
*ADDITIONAL PETITIONERS 2 AND 3 (LEGAL HEIRS OF THE
DECEASED SOLE PETITIONER) ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER
DATED 03.02.2021 IN IA NO.1/2021
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.N.RADHAKRISHNAN(THIRUVALLA)
SMT.ROBEKA JOHN
SRI.K.N.RADHAKRISHNAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD,
NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY.
2 THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER,
TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD,
NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003.
3 DEVASWOM ACCOUNTS OFFICER,
WP(C).No.3454 OF 2019 2
TAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD,
NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003.
BY ADVS.
R2 BY SRI.K.SASIKUMAR, SC, TDB
SRI. G.BIJU - SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
03.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.3454 OF 2019 3
JUDGMENT
The present petitioners are stated to
be the wife and son of Shri.S.Jayakumar
(who was the original sole petitioner), who
died subsequent to his retirement as an
Assistant Devaswom Commissioner of the 1st
respondent - Travancore Devaswom Board.
They say that on the eve of his retirement
Shri.Jayakumar was placed under suspension
and a liability was fixed on him, based on
an audit conducted by the Board and that he
had deposited the same to show his
bonafides, under protest.
2. They say that, subsequently,
through Ext.P3, this Court had found that
disciplinary action against Shri.Jayakumar
was unsustainable, but that in spite of
this, an amount of Rs.4,93,206/- was
deducted from his retiral benefits, as is
evident from Ext.P4. The petitioners,
therefore, pray that Ext.P4 be set aside
and the Board be directed to release the
entire amounts due to late Jayakumar at the
earliest.
3. In response to the afore
submissions made on behalf of the
petitioners by their learned counsel
Shri.K.N.Radhakrishnan, the learned
Standing Counsel for the Board,
Shri.G.Biju, submitted that Ext.P4 had been
issued taking note of the fact that a
liability was fixed against Shri.Jayakumar
and therefore, that the Board was fully
entitled to recover the same from his
retiral benefits. The learned Standing
Counsel, therefore, prayed that Ext.P4 be
not interdicted and that this writ petition
be dismissed.
4. I have considered the afore
submissions and have also gone through the
pleadings available on record.
5. The allegation against
Shri.Jayakumar was that he had
misappropriated certain amounts, but it is
evident from the pleadings that he had
remitted the said amount under protest.
Obviously, therefore, the Devaswom Board
could not have recovered any amounts from
his gratuity; and in that perspective, I
cannot find Ext.P4 to obtain favour of this
Court without further scrutiny.
6. I am, therefore, of the firm view
that the Board must reconsider the matter,
after affording an opportunity of being
heard to the petitioners, so that their
claims can be properly assessed and a
resultant order issued.
In the afore circumstances, I direct
the competent Authority of the Travancore
Devaswom Board to afford an opportunity of
being heard to the petitioners and to
thereafter decide whether the balance
amounts retained will require to be
disbursed to them, notwithstanding Ext.P4,
taking note of the specific circumstances
and facts impelled in this writ petition.
The afore exercise shall be completed
by the competent Authority of the
Travancore Devaswom Board, as expeditiously
as is possible, but not later than two
months from the date of receipt of a copy
of this judgment; and it is needless to say
that if the amounts are found due to the
petitioners, same shall be disbursed
without any avoidable delay thereafter, but
within one month from the date on which the
order resultant to these directions are
issued.
This writ petition is thus disposed of.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
MC/5.2.2021
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 THE COPY OF THE SUSPENSION ORDER DATED
24.2.14.
EXHIBIT P2 THE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS DATED 5.4.2016 OF
THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 THE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.NO.28177 OF
2016 DATED 23.10.2018.
EXHIBIT P4 THE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NUMBER
1158/16/E4 DATED 8.9.6 ALONG WITH THE
LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE MANAGER.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS
ANNEXURE A2(A) A TRUE COPYOF THE ORDER NO.ROC
NO.18325/06/OAD DATED 26.06.2007 ISSUED BY
THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER
