Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 22431 Ker
Judgement Date : 9 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 18TH KARTHIKA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 24585 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
1 MALABAR TEMPLE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS FEDERATION
P.O.MADURA, KASARAGODE-671124, REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRESIDENT, M.BABU, S/O. NARAYANAN, MADATHIL ILLOM,
P.O.EALANCHERY, KOZHIKKODE-673502.
2 T.M.SATYANARAYANAN,
S/O. KESAVAN NAMBEESAN, DEVAKRIPA, SWAMIMUKKU, KANNUR-
670521. (VICE PRESIDENT, MALABAR TEMPLE EXECUTIVE
OFFICERS FEDERATION).
3 K.VENUGOPAL,
S/O. PADMANABHAN NAIR, MEETHALEVAYAL, NADUVATHOOR,
KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE-673620, (WORKING PRESIDENT, MALABAR
TEMPLE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS FEDERATION).
4 K.C.SADASIVAN,
S/O. NARAYANAN NAMBIAR, NANDANAM, KATHIROOR EAST,
THALASSERY, KANNUR-670642, (GENERAL SECRETARY, MALABAR
TEMPLE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS FEDERATION).
5 E.NARAYANAN,
S/O. NARAYANAN NAMBEESAN, SARANAM, EDAKKADU, KOZHIKODE-
673005, (JOINT SECRETARY, MALABAR TEMPLE EXECUTIVE
OFFICERS FEDERATION).
6 K.UNNIKRISHNAN,
S/O. DAMODARA WARRIER, KAKKAMKOVIL, KANNUR-670562,
(TREASURER, MALABAR TEMPLE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
FEDERATION).
7 K.M.ARAVINDAKSHAN,
S/O. K.T.RAGHAVAN NAMBIAR, MUNDALLOOR P.O., KANNUR-
670622. (EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBER, MALABAR TEMPLE
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS FEDERATION).
8 A.VASUDEVAN NAMBOOTHIRI,
S/O. KRISHNAN NAMBOOTHIRI, ADIMANA ILLOM, P.O.NAMBRAM,
WP(C) NO. 24585 OF 2021
2
KANNUR-670741, (EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBER, MALABAR
TEMPLE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS FEDERATION).
9 M.MANOHARAN,
S/O. K.V.NARAYANAN, MULLAPPALLY, KANNUR-670631,
(EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBER, MALABAR TEMPLE
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS FEDERATION).
10 V.K.MURALEEDHARAN,
S/O. KUNHIKRISHNAN NAIR, VARAYALIN KEEZHIL,
BALUSSERY, KOZHIKODE-673612, (EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
MEMBER, MALABAR TEMPLE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
FEDERATION).
11 K.V.BABURAJ,
S/O. NARAYANA MARAR, KOTTILA VEEDU, RAMANTHALI,
KANNUR-670308, (EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBER, MALABAR
TEMPLE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS FEDERATION).
12 T.C.KRISHNAVARMA RAJU,
S/O. VASUDEVAN NAMBOOTHIRI, THEKKE KOVILAKAM,
NEELESWARAM, KASARAGODE-671314.
13 M.T.RAMANADHA SHETTY,
S/O. MUNDAPPA SHETTY, MANGALPADY, KASARAGODE-671324.
14 V.K.BALAKRISHNAN,
S/O. NARAYANAN NAIR, SIDHA SAMAJAM, VADAKARA,
KOZHIKODE-672304.
15 V.BABURAJ,
S/O. SEKHARAKURUP, PANTHEERAMKAVU, KOZHIKODE-673019.
BY ADV MOHAN C.MENON
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE REVENUE (DEVASWOM) SECRETARY,
REVENUE (DEVASWOM) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
WP(C) NO. 24585 OF 2021
3
2 THE MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER/SECRETARY,
ERANHIPALAM P.O., KOZHIKODE-673006.
OTHER PRESENT:
SC,R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN,GP V.VENUGOPAL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 24585 OF 2021
4
JUDGMENT
The petitioners are office bearers of Malabar Temple
Executive Officers federation, which is an unregistered
Association of Executive Officers. The grievance of the
petitioners in nutshell is that though the post of Executive
Officer, akin to Sub Group Officer/Administrative Officer in
Travancore Devaswom Board and Cochin Devaswom Board is
described as the Chief Executive authority of a temple, in the
service conditions of the executive officer/temple employees,
there is gross discrimination, against the executive officers.
The executive officer draws pay less than his subordinate staff
in the temple. In the case of age of retirement also there is
huge variation. The pay scale of the Malabar temple executive
officers and their conditions of service are not comparable with
the corresponding officers in the Travancore Devaswom Boards,
Cochin Devaswom Board and Guruvayoor Devaswom Board. It
is less than those given to the corresponding officers, it is
contended. They submitted Ext.P1 representation before the WP(C) NO. 24585 OF 2021
first respondent. The limited prayer sought by the petitioners is
for a direction to the first respondent, to take up, consider and
dispose of Ext.P1 on merits and to take appropriate decision on
Ext.P1, having regard to all other facts, as expeditiously as
possible.
2. In the light of the huge disparity that is projected by
the petitioners, I feel that, this is a matter which needs
consideration by the Government at high level. Accordingly,
there will be a direction to the first respondent to take
appropriate decision on Ext.P1, as expeditiously as possible, at
any rate, within a period of three months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment, after giving a reasonable
opportunity of being heard to two of the representatives of the
petitioners, representatives of the Devaswom Boards and all
other interested parties, either physically or online.
Writ Petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE
R.AV WP(C) NO. 24585 OF 2021
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24585/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 14.8.2021 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONERS' ASSOCIATION BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!