Krishnakumar B vs The Chairman
2021 Latest Caselaw 9431 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

           THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

    MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 1ST CHAITHRA, 1943

                      WP(C).No.28897 OF 2020(J)


PETITIONERS:

                KRISHNAKUMAR B
                AGED 35 YEARS
                S/O.V.BHASKARAN, SREEKRISHNA BHAVANAM, KOCHICKAL,
                MAVELIKARA P.O., ALAPPUZHA-690 101.

                BY ADVS.
                SRI.M.R.ARUNKUMAR
                SRI.P.SHAMMI NAVAS

RESPONDENT/S:

      1         THE CHAIRMAN, KERALA DEVASWOM RECRUITMENT BOARD,
                TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD BUILDING, M.G.ROAD,
                AYURVEDA COLLEGE JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695
                001.

      2         KERALA DEVASWOM RECRUITMENT BOARD,
                REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM
                BOARD BUILDING, M.G.ROAD, AYURVEDA COLLEGE
                JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

      3         S.VIJAYAKUMAR,
                S/O.SAHADEVA SARAMA, VISHAK BHAVANAM IYERKULANGARA,
                VAIKOM P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 141.

      4         RENJITH.R @ KANNAN CHAVARA,
                REJITHA BHAVANAM, THOTINU VADAKKU, CHAVARA P.O.,
                KOLLAM-691 583.

                R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR
                R3 BY ADV. SRI.T.SANJAY
                R4 BY ADV. SHRI.SANIL KUMAR G.
                R4 BY ADV. SHRI.MIDHUN R.

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04-
03-2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).29021/2020(C), THE COURT ON 22-03-2021
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C).Nos.28897 & 29021/2020
                                    2



             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                 PRESENT

            THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

   MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 1ST CHAITHRA, 1943

                       WP(C).No.29021 OF 2020(C)


PETITIONERS:

        1       HARIKUMAR B
                AGED 31 YEARS
                S/O V BHASKARAN, SREEKRISHNA BHAVANAM,
                KOCHICKAL, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA-690101.

        2       NANDAKUMAR
                AGED 27 YEARS
                S/O R KRISHNAKUMAR, PUTHENMADOM, A N PURAM,
                ALAPPUZHA-688011.

        3       RAHUL R
                AGED 30 YEARS
                S/O REGHUNATHAN NAIR,
                MIDHUL NIVAS, THRIPPERUMTHURA P O, CHENNITHALA,
                ALAPPUZHA-690105.

                BY ADVS.
                SRI.M.R.ARUNKUMAR
                SRI.P.SHAMMI NAVAS

RESPONDENTS:

        1       THE CHAIRMAN
                KERALA DEVASWOM RECRUITMENT BOARD, TRAVANCORE
                DEVASWOM BOARD BUILDING, M G ROAD, AYURVEDA
                COLLEGE JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
 W.P.(C).Nos.28897 & 29021/2020
                                 3

        2       KERALA DEVASWOM RECRUITMENT BOARD,
                REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TRAVANCORE
                DEVASWOM BOARD BUILDING,
                M G ROAD,
                AYURVEDA COLLEGE JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-
                695001.

        3       S VIJAYAKUMAR
                S/O SAHADEVA SARMA,
                VISHAK BHAVANAM, IYERKULANGARA, VAIKOM P O,
                KOTTAYAM-686141.

        4       RENJITH R @ KANNAN CHAVARA
                REJITHA BHAVANAM,
                THOTINU VADAKKU, CHAVARA P O,
                KOLLAM-691583.

                R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR
                R3 BY ADV. SRI.T.SANJAY
                R4 BY ADV. SHRI.SANIL KUMAR G.
                R4 BY ADV. SHRI.MIDHUN R.

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
04-03-2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).28897/2020(J), THE COURT ON
22-03-2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C).Nos.28897 & 29021/2020
                                       4


                                 JUDGMENT

[ WP(C).28897/2020, WP(C).29021/2020 ]

Dated this the 22nd day of March 2021

JUDGMENT

1. The prayer in W.P.(C).No.28897 of 2020 is a challenge

against Exhibit P12 notification and ranked list published

by the 2nd respondent for appointment to the post of Takil

player in the Guruvayur Devaswom Board. While prayers

in W.P.(C).No.29021 of 2020 is against Exhibits P6 and P7

notifications for appointment of Thaalam player and

Thakil player respectively in the Guruvayoor Devaswom.

2. The petitioners in these writ petitions claim to be

acclaimed Takil and Thaalam artists. It is contended that

they were applicants for the posts of Takil player and

Thaalam player respectively as notified by the

Guruvayoor Devswom Board. The selection was

conducted by the 2nd respondent, Kerala Devaswom

Recruitment Board (KDRB for short). W.P.(C).Nos.28897 & 29021/2020

3. In W.P.(C).No. 28897/2020, Exhibits P1 to P9 are

certificates relied on by the petitioner to contend that he

is a well known and acclaimed Thakil artist. Exhibit P10

is a notification issued by the 2 nd respondent dated

18.3.2020. It is stated that the petitioner had submitted

his application and was subjected to an interview by a

panel including the 3rd respondent. It is stated that the

interview lasted 48 minutes and the petitioner had

answered all questions and had performed well in the

interview. However, the 3rd respondent had verbally

insulted the petitioner and his knowledge and capacity

and expertise in Thakil. It is submitted that Exhibit P12

ranked list was thereafter published where the petitioner

was included as rank No.2 and the 4 th respondent as rank

No.1. It is contended that the 4 th respondent was

awarded full marks in the interview. It is stated that 4 th

respondent is a student of the 3 rd respondent. It is

alleged that the 3rd respondent is a group admin in a

Whatsapp group which conducts classes in which the 4 th

respondent was also a member. It is stated that the 3 rd W.P.(C).Nos.28897 & 29021/2020

respondent was therefore instrumental in selecting the

4th respondent. It is further contended that the 3 rd

respondent was found unfit by this Court to be appointed

as Principal in the Vaikom Kshethra Kalapeedam

managed by Travancore Devaswom Board by Exhibits

P15 and P16 judgments. The petitioner had submitted

Exhibit P17 request to the 1 st respondent for cancellation

of the ranked list and for conducting a re-selection which

has been ignored, pursuant to which the petitioner has

approached this Court. Additional documents have also

been sought to be produced by the petitioner in support

of his contentions.

4. A statement has been placed on record by the 1 st and 2nd

respondents. It is contended that Rule 7(4) of the Kerala

Devaswom Recruitment Board Rules, 2015 specifically

provides for an oral test to be conducted by the Board

with the representative of the concerned Devaswom

Boards to take part in the deliberations of the Board who

shall not be entitled to award marks. It is further stated W.P.(C).Nos.28897 & 29021/2020

that the Board can invite any person or persons with

expert knowledge in particular subjects to be present at

the interview to assist the Board, but such person or

persons shall not be entitled to award marks. It is

submitted that Smt.G.S.Shylamani, member of the 2 nd

respondent was the Chairperson of the interview Board.

Sri.P.C.Ravindranath, Member of the 2nd respondent,

Adv.K.B.Mohandas, Chairman of the Guruvayoor

Devaswom Managing Committee and Sri.Alappuzha

S.Vijayakumar and Prof.Vaikom Venugopal were the

invited expert members of the Interview Board. It is

stated that in terms of the guidelines issued by the KDRB

for the conduct of interview, interview was conducted

with a maximum of 50 marks. The 4th respondent was

awarded 30 marks and the petitioner was awarded only

15.98 marks. The interview for each candidates lasted for

about 45 minutes and their proficiency in playing the

instrument as well as theoretical knowledge was

thoroughly tested. All the members of the Interview

Board actively participated in the interview. It was found W.P.(C).Nos.28897 & 29021/2020

that the petitioner was short of theoretical knowledge

and did not perform as well as the 4th respondent in the

practical performance as well. It is contended that

marks were awarded in accordance with their merit. It is

submitted that the Chairman of the Guruvayoor

Devaswom Managing Committee as well as the invited

experts did not award any marks and that it was

members of the Board who had awarded marks in the

interview. It is submitted that the expert members were

persons who were well known in the field of Thakil and

Thaalam and the petitioner who had participated in the

interview cannot turn around and contend that the

experts included in the Board were not fit to function as

such after being unsuccessful in the selection procedure.

5. Similar are the contentions in the connected writ petition

as well. In W.P.(C).No.29021 of 2020, the petitioners were

applicants to the posts of Thaalam player and Thakil

player respectively. They also challenge the inclusion of

the 4th respondent in the ranked list as the same grounds W.P.(C).Nos.28897 & 29021/2020

as in W.P.(C).No.28897/2020. The 3rd respondent as well

as the 4th respondent has placed counter affidavits on

record. It is specifically submitted by both of them that

the 4th respondent was never the student of the 3 rd

respondent and that the membership in a Whatsapp

group of Thakil artists cannot, by any stretch of

imagination, be a reason to invalidate a legally conducted

selection.

6. Though several documents have been placed on record

and an attempt is made to draw this Court into an

appreciation of the relative merits of the candidates and

the competency of the subject experts, I find that the

issue falls within the narrow compass as to the legality of

a selection conducted by the KDRB. The learned counsel

for the petitioner relies on a decision of the Apex Court in

Ashok Kumar Yadav v. State of Haryana [AIR 1987 SC

454], Mineral Development Ltd.v.State of Bihar [AIR

1960 SC 438], while the learned Standing Counsel

appearing for the 1st respondent relies on the decisions of W.P.(C).Nos.28897 & 29021/2020

the Apex Court in Dalpat Abasaheb Solunke v.

Dr.B.S.Mahajan [AIR 1990 SC 434], K.A.Nagamani v.

Indian Airlines and others [(2009)5 SCC 515] and

Madan Lal and others v. State of Jammu and

Kashmir and others [AIR 1995 SC 1088].

7. Having considered the contentions advanced, I find that

the petitioners were applicants for the posts notified by

the KDRB. They had submitted their applications and

had appeared for the interview. It is now seen from the

pleadings on record that an interview Board had been

constituted with two members of the Recruitment Board,

a representative of the Devaswom Board and two experts

as its members. The specific case of respondents 1 and 2

is that neither the member of the Devaswom Board, nor

the expert members were eligible to award marks for the

interview. The interview admittedly was held on

19.11.2020. The petitioners attended the interview

without demur. Even after the interview they had no

complaints against the experts included in the panel. It is W.P.(C).Nos.28897 & 29021/2020

only when the select list had been published where the

4th respondent had been included in a better position that

the 1st complaint was raised by the petitioners. Though

several documents have been produced and arguments

have been raised with regard to the fairness of the

procedure, I find that there are specific rules governing

the conduct of selections by the respondents. It is

contended that the procedure prescribed by the rules

had been scrupulously followed by the respondents while

conducting the instant selection also. Counter affidavits

are also on record specifying that the 4 th respondent was

not a student of the 3rd respondent.

8. In the above factual situation, this Court would not be

justified in embarking on any examination as to the

competence or expertise of the persons who constituted

the selection committee or with regard to the reasons for

the award of marks to the candidates. The KDRB is a

statutory body constituted specifically for the conduct of W.P.(C).Nos.28897 & 29021/2020

selection. This procedure is regulated by prescribed

procedure. An examination with regard to the

competence of experts invited by the Board for the

conduct of the selection, who are not even empowered

to award marks or an attempt to examine the relative

merit of candidates is an exercise which falls outside the

ambit of the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court as

contemplated under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India.

9. In the light of the specific averments in the statement

filed on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 with regard to the

conduct of the selection and the award of marks, I am of

the opinion that no reliefs as sought for can be granted in

these writ petitions.

The writ petitions fail and are accordingly dismissed.

Sd/-

Anu Sivaraman, Judge sj W.P.(C).Nos.28897 & 29021/2020

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28897/2020 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY OCHIRA V.BHASKARAN TO THE PETITIONER DATED 08.11.2020.

EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE KANCHI KAMAKODI PEEDOM ASTHANA VIDWAN KAVALAM B.SREEKUMAR.

EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT STATION DIRECTOR ON THE BEHALF OF THE STATION DIRECTOR FROM PRASAR BHARATI (BROADCASTING CORPORATION OF INDIA) ALL INDIA RADIO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 01.06.2009.

EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF MERIT FOR YOUR FESTIVAL 2009 HELD AT KOTTAYAM ISSUED BY MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY TO THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF MERIT IN YOUTH FESTIVAL HELD AT ERNAKULAM ISSUED BY MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY TO THE PETIONER.

EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF THE EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATE DATED 06.08.2012 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR, SWARALAYA MUSIC COLLEGE.

EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM ADMINISTRATOR TO THE PETITIONER AS A TEACHER IN THAVIL ON TEMPORARY BASIS DATED 19.09.2012.

EXHIBIT P8 COPY OF THE PERFORMANCE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU CULTURAL CENTRE OF EMBASSY OF INDIA IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION.

W.P.(C).Nos.28897 & 29021/2020

EXHIBIT P9 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY OACHIRA V.SIVADASAN DATED 10.10.2020.

EXHIBIT P10 COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 18.03.2020.

EXHIBIT P11 COPY OF THE EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM MANAGING COMMITTEE DATED 16.11.2020.

EXHIBIT P12 COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION OF THE SELECTION LIST FOR THE RANK LIST NO.12/2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 18.12.2020.

EXHIBIT P13 COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BOARD FOR THE RANK LIST NO.7/2020 DATED 18.12.2020.

EXHIBIT P14 COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF PRINTOUT OF THE WHATSAPP GROUP KNOWN AS THAVILNADHAM.

EXHIBIT P15 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WPC NO.33546 OF 2019 DATED 13.07.2020.

EXHIBIT P16 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WA NO.1086 OF 2020 DATED 08.10.2020.

EXHIBIT P17 COPY OF THE LETTER E-MAILED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P18 COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY ONE NANDAKUMAR FILED UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT.

EXHIBIT P19 COPY OF THE REPLY TO EXHIBIT P18 APPLICATION ISSUED BY THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER/ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, VAIKOM GROUP DATED 16/12/2020

EXHIBIT P20 COPY OF THE SCREEN SHOTS OF GURUKULAM WHATSAPP GROUP W.P.(C).Nos.28897 & 29021/2020

EXHIBIT P21 COPY OF THE SCREEN SHOTS OF THAVILANDAM WHATSAPP GROUP

EXHIBIT P22 COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION OF THE RANK LIST ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 13/6/2018

EXHIBIT P23 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY MR.RAJEEV BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P24 COMPACT DISC CONTAINING THE COMMUNICATION OF WHATSAPP CHAT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT WITH RESPECT TO THE TEACHING AND MODE OF PAYMENT OF FEES AND BANK DETAILS.

EXHIBIT P25 VADYA VISARADA (THAVIL) CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT EXAMINATION, ADDITIONAL SECRETARY (WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION AND TYPEWRITTEN COPY)

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT R4(a): TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 10/12/2019 ISSUED BY SHRI.MAVELIKKARA K.GOPA KUMAR TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT R4(b): TRUE COPY OF A CERTIFICATE DATED 10/04/2010 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR RELEVANT SCHOOL OF MUSIC & MODERN TECHNOLOGY SASTHAMKOTTA, KOLLAM TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT R4(c): TRUE COPY OF THE EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY RELEVANT SCHOOL OF MUSIC & MODERN TECHNOLOGY SASTHAMKOTTA, KOLLAM TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT R4(d): TRUE COPY OF THE EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATE GURUVAYOOR SREEKRISHNA SWAMY TEMPLE, THEVALAKKARA, KOLLAM TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT R4(e): TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM PUBLISHED BY MATRUBHOOMI NEWS PAPER DATED 21/10/2014. W.P.(C).Nos.28897 & 29021/2020

EXHIBIT R4(f): A TRANSCRIPT OF THE TELEPHONIC CONVERSATION MADE BY SHRI.OCHIRA SIVADASAN TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT ON 18/11/2020.

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29021/2020 PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE KANCHI KAMAKODI PEEDOM ASHTHANA VIDWAN KAVALAM B SREEKUMAR TO THE 2ND PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM VADYA KALA VIDYALAYAM.

EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 22.11.2020.

EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 19.11.2020.

EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION OF THE SELECTION LIST ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 18.12.2020 IN CATEGORY NO.26/2020.

EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BOARD DATED 18.12.2020 IN CATEGORY NO.25/2020.

EXHIBIT P8 COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF PRINTOUT OF THE WHATSAPP GROUP KNOWN AS THAVILNADHAM.

EXHIBIT P9 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABEL COURT IN WPC NO.33546 OF 2019 DATED 13.07.2020.

EXHIBIT P10 COPY OF JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WA NO.1086 OF 2019 DATED 8.10.2020.

True copy

PS to Judge