Jaya Prakash vs The Commissioner
2021 Latest Caselaw 12638 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
           THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR
                                 &
      THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
     MONDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2021 / 10TH JYAISHTA, 1943
                     WP(C) NO. 6896 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:

      1     JAYA PRAKASH,
            AGED 65 YEARS
            S/O. PARAMMU, RESIDING AT J.S. MANDIRAM,
            ANNAPPARA, KADAKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT-
            691 536

      2     SUBHADRA P,
            AGED 60 YEARS
            W/O. JAYAPRAKASH, RESIDING AT J.S. MANDIRAM,
            ANNAPPARA, KADAKKAL VILLAGE,
            KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 536

            BY ADV V.A.AJIVASS


RESPONDENTS:

 1        THE COMMISSIONER,
          TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, KAWDIAR P.O,
          NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003

 2        TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TRAVANCORE
          DEVASWOM BOARD, KAWDIAR P.O, NANTHANCODE,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003

 3        DEPUTY DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER,
          TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, DEPUTY
          COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE, PATHANAMTHITTA -689 101.

 4        ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER,
          TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, ASSISTANT
 W.P.(C) No.6896 of 2021
                            ..2..



            COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE, PUNALUR, KOLLAM-691 305

     5      SUB GROUP OFFICER,
            TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, OFFICE NEAR KADAKKAL
            SHIVA TEMPLE, KADAKKAL, KOLLAM-691 536

     6      DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
            LOCAL FUND AUDIT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-
            695 003

     7      SHIBU KUMAR,
            AGED 58 YEARS
            S/O. VELAYUDA KURUPPU , RESIDING AT VAJANA BHAVAN,
            ALTHARAMOODU, KADAKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT-
            691 536

            SRI.G. BIJU, SC, TDB
            SR.G.P.-SRI.T.K.ANANDAKRISHNAN


THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
29.3.2021, THE COURT ON 31.05.2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.6896 of 2021
                            ..3..



                           JUDGMENT

Murali Purushothaman, J.

The petitioners; husband and wife participated in the

auction conducted by the Travancore Devaswom Board for

the sale of articles used for worship (poomala and pooja

drevengal) in Kadakkal Thaliyil temple, coming under the

Punalur Sub Group for the year 2021-2022. The petitioners

submitted separate tenders. As per the auction notice

published in the newspaper, the auction was slated to be

conducted on 15.02.2021. However, when the petitioners

reached the venue of auction, the Assistant Devaswom

Commissioner, the 4th respondent changed the date of

auction from 15.02.2021 to 16.02.2021. When the

petitioners reached the venue of auction on 16.02.2021, the

Assistant Devaswom Commissioner asked them to submit

their tenders before the sub group officer, the 5 th

respondent and accordingly the petitioners submitted their

separate tenders before the sub group officer. According to W.P.(C) No.6896 of 2021 ..4..

the petitioners, when the Assistant Devaswom

Commissioner commenced the auction procedure at about

11.45 am., the petitioners noticed that the sealed tenders

submitted by them were opened. Though the petitioners

pointed out this and raised their objection, the Assistant

Commissioner proceeded with the auction. The 7th

respondent is the highest bidder. Aggrieved by the alleged

illegal act of the Assistant Devaswom Commissioner, the

petitioners submitted Ext.P1 complaint dated 17.02.2021

before the 1st respondent, the Commissioner of Travancore

Devaswom Board. Though the 1st respondent called for a

report in the matter from the 4 th respondent, no steps have

been taken thereon to cancel the auction. Therefore the

petitioners have filed this writ petition for the following

reliefs;

i. Issue a writ of certiorari order or direction or any other appropriate writ or order calling for the records relating to Exhibit P1 complaint, and W.P.(C) No.6896 of 2021 ..5..

quash the same.

ii. to call for the records leading to the Petitioner's case from the respondents 1 to 4 and issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction to cancel the auction and the proceedings held on 16.02.2021, for the sale of articles used for worship (poomala, poojadrevengal) in Kadakkal Thaliyil temple, coming under the Punalur Sub Group for the year 2021-2022.

iii. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the Respondents 1 to 3 to take fair and effective enquiry to curb the illegal activities conducted by the 4th respondent and to provide, adequate compensation to the petitioners.

iv. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the Respondents No: 1 to 4 to consider and finalize the Exhibit P1 representation filed by the petitioners forthwith.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the

learned Government Pleader and learned standing counsel

for the Travancore Devaswom Board.

W.P.(C) No.6896 of 2021 ..6..

3. The counsel for the petitioners made submissions on

the basis of the averments in the writ petition and inviting

our attention to Ext.P1 representation filed before the 1 st

respondent. The counsel contended that, at the time when

the auction proceedings commenced, the petitioners noted

that the sealed tenders submitted by the petitioners were

opened and objection in this regard was raised before the

4th respondent. The 7th respondent could quote higher rates

since the sealed tenders were tampered with, with the

connivance of the 4th respondent. The rate quoted by the

7th respondent was only slightly above the rate quoted by

the 2nd petitioner in the auction. The petitioners have in

Ext.P1 representation offered higher rates than that quoted

by the 7th respondent. The petitioners allege that it is only

with the connivance of the 4 th respondent and on

extraneous considerations the 7th respondent became the

successful bidder. The counsel submitted that the auction W.P.(C) No.6896 of 2021 ..7..

shall be cancelled.

4. Sri. G.Biju, the learned standing counsel for the

Travancore Devaswom Board, on instructions, submitted

that the allegation that sealed tenders submitted by the

petitioners were opened before the auction proceedings

commenced, is not correct and the petitioners are digging

reasons to cancel the auction on coming to know that the

7th respondent has quoted higher rates. The subsequent

offer of higher rates by the petitioners cannot be accepted

and the auction has been confirmed in favour of the 7 th

respondent.

5. In Ext.P1 representation, allegations are raised

against the Assistant Devaswom Commissioner, who has

been arrayed as a respondent in official capacity. The

allegations are mostly unconnected with the conduct of

auction held on 16.02.2021. It is trite that when allegations

of malafides are made, the person concerned shall be W.P.(C) No.6896 of 2021 ..8..

personally impleaded as a party so that he can answer the

allegations raised against him. The Assistant Devaswom

Commissioner against whom the allegations are made is

not arrayed as a party to the writ petition in personal

capacity. Therefore, the writ petition has to fail on that

short ground.

6. The writ petition is filed bereft of necessary details

and even the auction notice is not produced. Allegations

are raised against the 4th respondent without impleading

him in personal capacity. There are no materials on record

strongly indicating the genuineness of the allegation to

infer any malafide action on the part of the 4 th respondent

to favour the 7th respondent. The small difference in the

rates quoted by the bidders cannot lead to an inference

that the sealed tenders have been tampered with. We do

not find any illegality in the auction conducted by the

respondents for the sale of pooja articles. W.P.(C) No.6896 of 2021 ..9..

There is no merit in the writ petition and accordingly,

the writ petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

C.T. RAVIKUMAR JUDGE

Sd/-

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE W.P.(C) No.6896 of 2021 ..10..

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6896/2021

ANNEXURE/EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 17.02.2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS 1 AND 3.

spc/