Judicial directions regarding recruitment must be strictly adhered to by managing bodies of controlled religious institutions.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

P.G. Ajithkumar, J.

W.P.(C) No.16025 of 2019:- The petitioner is a devotee of Kottiyoor Mahadeva Temple, Manathala. It is a Temple under the administration of Kottiyoor Devaswom and a controlled religious institution under the Malabar Devaswom Board. When there was an attempt to appoint employees in various posts in the Temple, there arose allegations. The Malabar Devaswom Board did not readily approve the appointments initiated by the Board of Trustees. In that situation, the Board of Trustees filed W.P.(C) No.37493 of 2016, which was disposed of by Ext.P1 judgment dated 17.08.2017. This Court gave specific directions to the Board of Trustees in the matter of appointment and to complete the whole exercise within a period of five months from the date of receipt of the judgment. The petitioner alleging that respondent Nos.1 to 4, without following the said directions is trying to appoint respondent Nos.5 to 17 as employees in the Temple. It is also alleged that their selection is vitiated by bias and nepotism. In such circumstances, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking the following reliefs;-

“(i) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction compelling and commanding the respondents 1 to 4 to remove the respondents 5 to 14 from the posts now they are holding/appointed in the Kottiyoor Mahadeva Temple.

(ii) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction compelling and commanding the respondents 1 to 4 to recover the salary, allowances, etc. given to the respondents 5 to 14 with immediate effects.

(iii)To declare that the selection process conducted by the 4th respondent selection and appointment of respondents 5 to 14 in the Kottiyoor Mahadeva Temple was not done in accordance with directions in Ext.P1 judgment and as such they are liable to be terminated with immediate effect;

(iv) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction compelling and commanding respondents 1 to 4 not to permit the respondents 5 to 14 hold any post in the Kottiyoor Mahadeva Temple.”

1.2 The 4th respondent has filed a counter affidavit producing therewith Exts.R4(a) to R4(i). As per Ext.R4(h) order, the Commissioner of the Malabar Devaswom Board accorded approval to the appointment of respondent Nos.5 to

17.

1.3 The petitioner has filed a reply-affidavit producing therewith Exts.P3 and P4.

2. D.B.P.No.51 of 2019:- This D.B.P. was initiated based on a complaint submitted by the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.16025 of 2019 alleging irregularities and malpractices in the recruitment of employees to various posts in Kottiyoor Devaswom. The allegations in the said complaint are also similar as raised in the Writ Petition. Violation of the directions in the judgment in W.P. (C) No.37493 of 2016 has also been alleged. On receipt of that complaint, this Court called for a report from the Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board. After considering the report submitted by the Commissioner and the attending circumstances, this Court suo motu initiated this D.B.P.

3. When this Writ Petition is taken up for consideration today, the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner would submit that in the light of the subsequent developments, the petitioner does not propose to pursue this Writ Petition. The learned counsel accordingly seeks permission to withdraw this Writ Petition without prejudice to his right to seek appropriate remedy in the matter.

4. Recording the said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn without prejudice to the aforesaid right of the petitioner. The factual and legal contentions raised by the parties are left open.

5. Since the matter involved in D.B.P.No.51 of 2019 is also the same, the D.B.P. is also disposed of.

Sd/-

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE Sd/-

P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE dkr APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16025/2019 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) 37493/2