Point of Law : Review proceedings are not by way of an appeal and have to be strictly confined to the scope and ambit of Order 47 Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure.

ORDER :

K.BABU, J.

These Review Petitions are filed for reviewing the judgment passed by this Court on 15.09.2021 in Writ Petition No.19758/2016 and W.A.No.196/2021.

2. The Review Petitioner in R.P.No.48/2022 is the petitioner in W.P(C)No.19758/2016. The Review Petitioner in R.P.No.49/2022 is the appellant in W.A.No.196/2021.

3. The operative portion of the impugned judgment reads thus:

“On the basis of the above discussion, we come to the following conclusions:

1. The Travancore Devaswom Board has had statutory procedures for recruitment to the regular/permanent posts all throughout as narrated below:

In view of Section 29A of the TCHRI Act, 1950, during the period of the temporary/provisional appointment of the petitioners (with effect from 01-10-2011), appointment to regular/permanent posts held by the petitioners was to be done only from the select list prepared by the Kerala Public Service Commission as per Kerala Public Service Commission (Additional Functions As Respects the Administrative Services Under Devaswom Boards) Act, 2008 read with Kerala Public Service Commission (Additional Functions As Respects the Administrative Services Under Devaswom Boards) Rules, 2009. With effect from 10-11-2012, Section 29A was omitted from the TCHRI Act, 1950, and the Kerala Public Service Commission (Additional Functions As Respects the Administrative Services Under Devaswom Boards) Act, 2008 was repealed as per Act 1 of 2014 aforementioned. Therefore, during the period from 10-11-2012 to 01-03-2014, Rules 4, 9, 12 read with Schedule III of the Special Rules framed under Section 35 of the TCHRI Act, 1950 governed the field of appointment. On 01-03-2014, the Kerala Devaswom Recruitment Board Act, 2015 came into force, by which an autonomous Devaswom Recruitment Board was constituted, for preparing the select list of candidates for appointment in various posts other than hereditary posts and posts in aided educational institutions in the Devaswom Boards of the State of Kerala. With effect from 01-03-2014, appointment to regular/permanent posts in respect of the posts held by the petitioners can only be done from the select list prepared by the Recruitment Board.

2. The petitioners have never undergone a selection process as per the statutory scheme prescribed to hold a regular/permanent post in the Devaswom Board.

3. The petitioners were appointed provisionally in the existing vacancies initially for a period of 89 days, and they were allowed to continue for a period, not beyond 179 days and the Devaswom Board never intended to allow the petitioners to continue for a period beyond 179 days.

4. The petitioners continued in the service of the Devaswom Board beyond the period of 179 days under cover of orders of this Court during the various stages of the litigative proceedings.

5. Since statutory procedures were in existence, for the appointment to the regular/permanent cadre all throughout the period during which the petitioners held posts in the Devaswom Board, and the petitioners have not gone through the selection process prescribed by the statutes that governed the field, they are not entitled to regularisation as claimed.

6. In Umadevi (supra) the Apex Court declared that regularisation should be permitted only as a one-time measure subject to the conditions mentioned in paragraph 53 of the judgment. The petitioners remained in the service of the Devaswom Board as per the orders of this Court during various stages of litigative proceedings. Moreover, they have not continued to work up to the cut-off period of ten years, prescribed in paragraph 53 of the judgment in Umadevi. Therefore, the petitioners are not entitled to regularisation in terms of the directions contained in paragraph 53 of the judgment in Umadevi (supra).

7. The Devaswom Board is obliged to make appointments to the permanent/regular posts following the statutory procedures framed in this regard and in fulfilment of the constitutional obligation as laid down in Articles 14, 15,