Kerala High Court
Cochin Devaswom Board vs Cochin Devaswom Board on 25 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 5TH MAGHA, 1942
RP.No.717 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 1538/2018
JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 1538/2018(N) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
DATED 26.3.2019
------------------
REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT :-
COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD
ROUND NORTH TRICHUR - 680 001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.NARAYANAN (PARUR)
SMT.LISHA K.R.
RESPONDENT/PETITIONER :-
P. GIREESH KUMAR, AGED 51 YEARS
S/O. GOVINDAN NAIR, VADAPURATH HOUSE,
PERUMPALLY P. O., ERNAKULAM.
BY ADV.K.A.SANJEETHA
BY ADV.ELVIN PETER
BY ADV.RENJITH NARAYAN
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
19-01-2021, ALONG WITH RP.744/2020, RP.745/2020 AND
RP.789/2020, THE COURT ON 25-01-2021 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
R.P. No.717/2020 in W.P.(C) No.1538/2018,
R.P. No.744/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2342/2018,
R.P. No.745/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2503/2018 and
R.P. No.789/2020 in W.P.(C) No.38496/2017
-: 2 :-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 5TH MAGHA, 1942
RP.No.744 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 2342/2018
JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 2342/2018(P) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
DATED 26.3.2019
------------------
REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS :-
1 THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD
DEVASWOM BUILDING, THRISSUR - 680 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2 THE SECRETARY,
THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD
DEVASWOM BUILDING, THRISSUR - 680 001.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.NARAYANAN (PARUR)
SMT.LISHA K.R.
RESPONDENT/PETITIONER :-
SIVANANDAN.A, AGED 54 YEARS
S/O. KUMARA MENON, AMMAPPILLY HOUSE,
CHERUVALOOR, KORATTY, THRISSUR - 680 308
BY ADV. ELVIN PETER P.J.
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
19-01-2021, ALONG WITH RP.717/2020, RP.745/2020 AND RP.789/2020,
THE COURT ON 25-01-2021 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
R.P. No.717/2020 in W.P.(C) No.1538/2018,
R.P. No.744/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2342/2018,
R.P. No.745/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2503/2018 and
R.P. No.789/2020 in W.P.(C) No.38496/2017
-: 3 :-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 5TH MAGHA, 1942
RP.No.745 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 2503/2018
JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 2503/2018(K) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
DATED 26.3.2019
-------------------
REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS :-
1 THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD
DEVASWOM BUILDING, THRISSUR - 680 001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
2 THE SECRETARY,
THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, DEVASWOM BUILDING,
THRISSUR - 680 001
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.NARAYANAN (PARUR)
SMT.LISHA K.R.
RESPONDENT/PETITIONER :-
P.M.MURALI, AGED 51 YEARS
S/O. MALLU, PANAPARAMBIL HOUSE, ANNAMANADA P.O,
THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 741.
BY ADV. ELVIN PETER P.J.
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
19-01-2021, ALONG WITH RP.717/2020, RP.744/2020 AND RP.789/2020,
THE COURT ON 25-01-2021 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
R.P. No.717/2020 in W.P.(C) No.1538/2018,
R.P. No.744/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2342/2018,
R.P. No.745/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2503/2018 and
R.P. No.789/2020 in W.P.(C) No.38496/2017
-: 4 :-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 5TH MAGHA, 1942
RP.No.789 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 38496/2017
JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 38496/2017(J) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
DATED 26.3.2019
-------------------
REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS :-
1 THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THRISSUR ROUND NORTH,
THRISSUR - 680 001.
2 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
THIRUVANJIKKULAM GROUP, COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD,
KODUNGALLOOR, THRISSUR.
3 THE VIGILANCE OFFICER (ENQUIRY OFFICER),
COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, THRISSUR - 680 001.
4 THE SPECIAL DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER,
OFFICE OF THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD,
THRISSUR - 680 001.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.NARAYANAN (PARUR)
SMT.LISHA K.R.
RESPONDENT/PETITIONER :-
T.S.AMBEDKAR
MAASAPPIDI, (FORMER) ANNAMANADA DEVASWOM,
S/O.SINKARAN, THEVARPADATH VEEDU,
AVITTAPPILLI DESOM, P.O.MATTATHUR, MUKUNDAPURAM,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680 684.
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
19-01-2021, ALONG WITH RP.717/2020, RP.744/2020 AND RP.745/2020,
THE COURT ON 25-01-2021 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
R.P. No.717/2020 in W.P.(C) No.1538/2018,
R.P. No.744/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2342/2018,
R.P. No.745/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2503/2018 and
R.P. No.789/2020 in W.P.(C) No.38496/2017
-: 5 :-
ANU SIVARAMAN, J.
--------------------------------------------------------
R.P. No.717 of 2020 in W.P.(C) No.1538 of 2018,
R.P. No.744 of 2020 in W.P.(C) No.2342 of 2018,
R.P. No.745 of 2020 in W.P.(C) No.2503 of 2018 and
R.P. No.789 of 2020 in W.P.(C) No.38496 of 2017
----------------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 25th day of January, 2021
ORDER
These review petitions are filed seeking a review of the common
judgment dated 26.3.2019. The sole ground raised for review of the
judgment is that a subsequent decision of the Apex Court has not
been noticed while rendering the judgment. It is contended that the
decision of the Apex Court in Management of Bharat Heavy
Electricals Ltd. v. M. Mani [2017 KHC 6765] was not brought to the
notice of this Court which has resulted in an error of law which
vitiates the judgment.
2. I have considered the contentions advanced. The facts of
the case are as follows :- The petitioners had been placed under
suspension and disciplinary proceedings as well as judicial
proceedings were taken against them. There was an acquittal in the
criminal case. In earlier round of writ petitions, the petitioners had
approached this Court seeking reinstatement in service. This Court
had directed the respondents to consider the request for
reinstatement taking note of the acquittal in the criminal cases.
R.P. No.717/2020 in W.P.(C) No.1538/2018,
R.P. No.744/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2342/2018,
R.P. No.745/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2503/2018 and
R.P. No.789/2020 in W.P.(C) No.38496/2017
However, relying on a disputed oral confession made by the
delinquent officers before the Board, the Board had refused to
consider the effect of the acquittal by the criminal court. This was
under challenge. After considering the contentions advanced on
either side, this Court held that the refusal on the part of the
respondents to consider the impact of the acquittal in the criminal
case on identical charges vitiated the order of the Board and directed
reconsideration of the issue, taking note of the decisions of the Apex
Court including the decision in Bhaskar Reddy S & another v.
Superintendent of Police [2014 KHC 4752].
3. The learned counsel for the review petitioner would
contend that the decision in Management of Bharat Heavy
Electricals Ltd.'s case supra lays down a different proposition and
that as such, the judgment is vitiated. I am unable to agree with the
arguments.
4. The decision in Management of Bharat Heavy
Electricals Ltd.'s case only laid down a proposition that in a case
where the Labour Court had found that the departmental enquiry was
properly conducted, the remand of the case to the Labour Court on
the ground of acquittal in criminal proceedings was not proper. This
Court, while rendering the judgment under review was fully aware of
R.P. No.717/2020 in W.P.(C) No.1538/2018,
R.P. No.744/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2342/2018,
R.P. No.745/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2503/2018 and
R.P. No.789/2020 in W.P.(C) No.38496/2017
the case law on the point with regard to the applicability of the
judgments in criminal cases and their effect on pending disciplinary
proceedings. This Court had considered the issue on an earlier
occasion and had specifically directed the consideration of the
request of the petitioners for reinstatement taking note of their
honourable acquittal in the criminal case. It was the order passed by
the Cochin Devaswom Board pursuant to the directions issued by this
Court, which was under challenge in the writ petitions and this Court,
after considering the issue had specifically found that the order
passed without considering the acquittal, at least as a relevant fact,
was completely erroneous and untenable. The contention of the
respondents that the standard of proof in a criminal proceedings and
in disciplinary matters are different had been specifically considered
in the judgment. It was thereafter that a direction was issued to
reconsider the issue taking note of the acquittal as well.
5. Having considered the contentions advanced, I am of the
opinion that the contention that a judgment had not been brought to
the notice of this Court is not a ground for review of the judgment. I
further find that even if the judgment relied on had been brought to
the notice of this Court, it would have made no difference whatsoever
since the judgment relied on in the review petitions does not lay down
R.P. No.717/2020 in W.P.(C) No.1538/2018,
R.P. No.744/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2342/2018,
R.P. No.745/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2503/2018 and
R.P. No.789/2020 in W.P.(C) No.38496/2017
any absolute proposition that the acquittal in a criminal case is not to
be looked into in any circumstances.
In the above view of the matter, there is absolutely no error
of law or fact vitiating the judgment which justifies a review. The
review petitions, therefore, fail and the same are, accordingly,
dismissed.
Sd/-
ANU SIVARAMAN
JUDGE
Jvt/21.1.2021
R.P. No.717/2020 in W.P.(C) No.1538/2018,
R.P. No.744/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2342/2018,
R.P. No.745/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2503/2018 and
R.P. No.789/2020 in W.P.(C) No.38496/2017
APPENDIX OF RP 717/2020
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 26.03.2019 IN
W.P.(C) NO.1538/2018 OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF
THIS HON'BLE COURT.
R.P. No.717/2020 in W.P.(C) No.1538/2018,
R.P. No.744/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2342/2018,
R.P. No.745/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2503/2018 and
R.P. No.789/2020 in W.P.(C) No.38496/2017
APPENDIX OF RP 744/2020
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE SUSPENSION ORDER IS DATED 31-10-
2008 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY, COCHIN DEVASWOM
BOARD
ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF CHARGES DATED 28-
04-2009
ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF THE FINDINGS OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT
DATED 30-09-2009 SUBMITTED BY THE ENQUIRY OFFICER
BEFORE THE PETITIONER BOARD.
ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 8-12-2009
ANNEXURE E TRUE COPY OF THE TERMINATION ORDER 10873/2008
DATED 19-2-2011 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER BOARD
ANNEXURE F TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 30-04-2013 BY THE
JFCM CHALAKUDY IN C.C NO. 551/09
ANNEXURE G A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28-02-2017 IN
W.P(C) NO. 16565/2011
ANNEXURE H TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11-10-2017 IN
C.O.C 1730/2017
ANNEXURE I TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. M. 10873/2008 DATED
12-10-2017
R.P. No.717/2020 in W.P.(C) No.1538/2018,
R.P. No.744/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2342/2018,
R.P. No.745/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2503/2018 and
R.P. No.789/2020 in W.P.(C) No.38496/2017
APPENDIX OF RP 745/2020
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 26-03-2019 IN
W.P(C) NO. 2503/2018 OF THE LEARNED SIGLE JUDGE OF
THIS HON'BLE COURT.
