SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Ker) 2030

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S.
Sabarimala Special Duty Employees – Appellant
Versus
Travancore Devaswom Board – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Respondent: SRI. S. RAJMOHAN, SR. GP, SRI. G. BIJU, SC, TDB, SRI. P. RAMAMCHANDRAN, AMICUS CURIAE

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - The court held that complaints regarding deployment of Devaswom employees during Mandala-Makaravilakku festival seasons must be addressed through writ petitions under Article 226. (!) - The Ombudsman’s reports noting ongoing issues with employee deployment are to be considered in light of existing judicial directives, and complaints should be pursued in writ jurisdiction rather than through the Ombudsman for guidelines. (!) (!) - The court disposed of the DBP, directing that complaints regarding deployment should be resolved under writ jurisdiction, and issued procedural directions for staffing and reporting related to special duty deployments at Sabarimala, including timelines and publication requirements. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) - The matter references and reiterates adherence to the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act provisions governing administration, supervision, and control by the Travancore Devaswom Board, including Sections 3, 4, 15, 15A, and 16. (!) (!) (!) (!)

What is the proper forum for challenging deployment guidelines for Devaswom staff during Mandala-Makaravilakku festival seasons?

What is the court's ruling regarding whether complaints about staff deployment should be addressed under writ jurisdiction (Article 226) rather than Ombudsman or other forums?

What directives did the court issue to the Travancore Devaswom Board and related authorities to manage staff deployment during festival seasons?


Table of Content
1. provisions of the travancore-cochin hindu religious institutions act (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
2. issues and guidelines regarding employee deployment (Para 9 , 10)
3. conclusion and directives for employee deployment (Para 12)

ORDER :

Anil K. Narendran, J.

This DBP is registered based on Report No.13 of 2025 of the learned Ombudsman in Complaint No.18 of 2025 made by Sabarimala Special Duty Employees. The said report of the learned Ombudsman reads thus;

“The grievance of the complainant in this case is that there was no guidelines provided for posting employees at Nilakkal during festival season. Particular employees alone were given preference for such postings. If all the employees are posted at different places in Sabarimala so that they may be able to get allowance as in the case of other employees. Some guidelines will have to be framed for this purpose for which they approached the Ombudsman.

Devaswom Commissioner has filed report dated 18.02.2025 denying the allegations. However, on enquiry it was revealed from the Liaison Officer that in respect of complaints from Sabarimala, there is already a matter pending before the Honourable High Court as DBP No.116 of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top