The Board Of Trustees vs The Board Of Trustees
2021 Latest Caselaw 7403 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

   WEDNESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 12TH PHALGUNA, 1942

              RP.No.961 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 22348/2020

   AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 22348/2020(P) DATED 16.11.2020


REVIEW PETITIONER/4TH RESPONDENT IN WRIT PETITION:

             THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, SREE KAMPURATH DEVASWOM,
             MOKAVOOR P.O., ERANHIKKAL, KOZHIKODE-673 303,
             REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.

             BY ADVS.
             SMT.A.K.PREETHA
             SRI.C.ANIL KUMAR

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN WRIT PETITION:

      1      DILEEP KUMAR NAMBOODIRI K, AGED 40 YEARS
             S/O.UNNIKRISHNAN NAMBOOTHIRI, SANTHI,
             SREE KAMPURATH DEVASWOM, MOKAVOOR P.O.,
             ERANHIKKAL, KOZHIKODE-673 303.

      2      K.KESAVAN NAMBEESAN, AGED 58 YEARS
             S/O.M.T.KESAVAN NAMBEESAN, KAZHAKAM,
             SREE KAMPURATH DEVASWOM, MOKAVOOR P.O.,
             ERANHIKKAL, KOZHIKODE-673 303.

      3      K.P.PRAKASAN, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O.MOOTHORAKUTTY,
             ADICHU THALI, SREE KAMPURATH DEVASWOM,
             MOKAVOOR P.O., ERANHIKKAL, KOZHIKODE-673 303.

      4      UNNIKRISHNAN NAMBEESAN.P., AGED 62 YEARS
             S/O.UNNIKRISHNAN NAMBEESAN, VAZHIPADU CLERK,
             SREE KAMPURATH DEVASWOM, MOKAVOOR P.O.,
             ERANHIKKAL, KOZHIKODE-673 303.

      5      THE MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS
             COMMISSIONER, HOUSE FED COMPLEX, ERANHIPALAM,
             KOZHIKODE-673 006.

      6      THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD,
             3RD FLOOR, D BLOCK, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE-673 020.
 RP 961/20
                               2


        7   THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SREE KAMPURATH DEVASWOM,
            MOKAVOOR P.O., ERANHIKKAL, KOZHIKODE-673 303.


            SRI.R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN-SC

     THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION        ON
03.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 RP 961/20
                                         3

                                    ORDER

This petition, seeking review of the

judgment dated 16.11.2020 in W.P.

(C)No.22348/2020, has been filed by the 4th

respondent therein - which is the Board of

Trustees of the Kampurath Devaswom, saying

that, on account of certain omissions on their

side, they were unable to arrange for

representation on their behalf, when the said

judgment was delivered by this Court.

2. Sri.C.Anil Kumar - learned counsel for

the review petitioner, submitted that his

client has, per se, no objection to the

directions in the judgment; but that they may

be given liberty to approach the Government

for necessary funding to pay the arrears of

salary of their employees and that for such

purpose, they be given some more time. He

submitted that his client is constrained to

make this request because, on account of the

Covid-19 pandemic disruptions, the temple had RP 961/20

no income in the year 2020-21 and therefore,

is unable to honour the eligible salary of its

employees.

3. In response, Sri.R.Lakshmi Narayan -

learned Standing Counsel for the Malabar

Devaswom Board, submitted that, taking note of

the attenuation of income of the various

temples under the Board, a scheme has now been

propounded, wherein, all those temples which

are unable to pay arrears of salary and other

benefits to its employees even after using 50%

of their fixed deposits, will be entitled to

funding from the Government, for which

purpose, a corpus of Rs.20 Crore has been now

set apart. He, however, submitted that in this

case, the review petitioner may not be

entitled to any such benefit because they have

Rs.17.5 lakhs in fixed deposits, apart from

Rs.3,22,387/- in their savings account, which

would be sufficient to pay off the salary of

their employees, even if only 50% of the said RP 961/20

fixed deposit is used for the same.

4. When I hear the learned Standing

Counsel as afore, it is obvious that the

review petitioner is now obligated to use upto

50% of their fixed deposits for the purpose of

payment of salary and benefits to their

employees and this, coupled with the amount

which is available in the savings account,

will certainly be sufficient to honour the

same.

I, therefore, cannot find any reason why I

must review this judgment and I, therefore,

close it; however, leaving liberty to the

review petitioner to approach the Government

or the Malabar Devaswom Board appropriately

for any benefit that they may require,

including under the Covid-19 Schemes.

Sd/-

                                               DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
       RR                                               JUDGE