K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.

This Writ Petition has been preferred by an Organization by name Guruvayoor Prathikarana Vedi challenging Ext.P11 order of stay and also the final order passed by the Government on 21.1.2004 entertaining a Revision Petition preferred by the fifth respondent under S.33 of the Guruvayoor Devaswom Act, 1978.

2. The Government by the impugned order set aside the resolutions dated 25.2.2002 and 11.8.2003 passed by the Guruvayoor Devaswom Committee and the show cause notice issued by the Administrator to the fifth respondent based on the resolution. Managing Committee by those proceedings found that the order passed by the previous Managing Committee on 10.6.1995 setting aside all the punishments imposed on the fifth respondent by entertaining a Review Petition is illegal and without jurisdiction. The legality of the various orders passed by the Government and of the previous Managing Committee dated 10.6.1995 is the subject matter of these proceedings. These proceedings would demonstrate the callous and indifferent manner in which various committees manage the affairs of the temple and how indiscipline is being perpetuated.

3. The fifth respondent while working as Assistant Lineman in the service of the Guruvayoor Devaswom on 29.7.1988 was placed under suspension vide File No.B6/4707/88 on the allegation that he used Oottupura of the temple for immoral traffic. Enquiry was conducted and he was found guilty and imposed the punishment of barring of increment with cumulative effect but was reinstated in service on 21.9.1989. Fifth respondent filed appeal against the said order before the Managing Committee. Appeal was dismissed on 3.11.1989. Fifth respondent was again placed under suspension alleging that he had entered room No.4 of Sathram South Block on 30.7.1989 at 2.45 a.m. and misbehaved towards a lady inmate. Enquiry was conducted and he was found guilty. Increment was barred for a period of six months without cumulative effect on 16.5.1991. He preferred appeal against the said order as well before the Managing Committee which was dismissed on 27.1.1992. He was again placed under suspension on 18.4.1999 on the allegation that he disobeyed the direction of the higher authorities. Enquiry was conducted and increment in his salary was barred with cumulative effect as per order dated 27.5.1989. Against the said order fifth respondent preferred appeal before the Managing Committee which was also dismissed. Fifth respondent was again suspended for misbehaviour towards the Administrator, on 3.10.1990. He was again placed under suspension for unauthorized absence, on 14.6.1991. He was also placed under suspension on 8.12.1997 on the allegation that he had misbehaved towards the Magistrate of Chavakkad.

4. Fifth respondent after a lapse of several years filed a Review Petition dated 23.5.1995 before the Managing Committee to review the appellate orders dated 3.11.1989 and 29.1.1992 by which the punishment imposed on him were confirmed. The Committee entertained the Review Petition and set aside the punishments awarded. The decision of the Committee reads as follows:

Apart from stating that the Committee had examined the Review Petition and decided to cancel all the punishments imposed, no reasons have been stated which prompted the Committee to review its orders and to revoke the punishment.

5. Guruvayoor Devaswom Employees Organization however questioned the legality and the propriety of the Managing Committee in entertaining the Review Petition and setting aside the appellate orders, by which punishments imposed were upheld. The Association strongly deprecated the practice of entertaining the Review Petition and to set at naught the decision taken by the earlier Managing Committee. Employees Organization also pointed out that if the Managing Committee is taking a decision to review the punishments imposed on the fifth respondent, the Committee should also review other decisions taken by the previous Managin