Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 31791
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Harisankar V. Menon, J
Kunhikrishnan Namboothiri – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 34874 OF 2022
For the Appellants/Petitioners: T.V.Jayakumar Namboodiri
For the Respondents: R.Ranjanie, Mahesh V Ramakrishnan, Jessy.S.Salim
The High Court directed the competent statutory authority to consider a pay revision proposal submitted by temple management for its employees, emphasizing the necessity of administrative processing in line with government policy and the principles of natural justice.
Headnote:The petitioners, serving as Melsanthi and Keezhsanthi in a temple managed by the fourth respondent, filed this writ petition seeking extension of pay revision benefits granted by the State Government. The core issue involved the entitlement of temple employees to salary revisions sanctioned by the State. During the litigation, it was revealed that the temple management had issued a communication acknowledging the claim and recommending the extension of these benefits to the employees. The court observed that the fourth respondent had expressed its willingness to extend the benefits, necessitating formal approval or consideration by the competent authority. The primary legal point addressed was the obligation of statutory bodies to consider administrative recommendations regarding salary parity. The court emphasized the need for administrative action to align employee benefits with relevant government guidelines. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the third respondent, the Commissioner of the Malabar Devaswom Board, to consider the recommendation made by the temple management and pass appropriate orders within three months, ensuring that the petitioners, including those who had since resigned, were granted an opportunity of being heard.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. administrative mandate to process pay revision recommendations for temple employees. (Para 1 , 2) |
HARISANKAR V. MENON, J.
---------------------------------------------
WP(C) No. 34874 of 2022 -----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 26th day of May, 2026 JUDGMENT Heard; Sri.Jayakumar Namboodiri, the learned Counsel for the petitioners, Smt.Renjini, the learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent / Malabar Devaswom Board and Sri.Mahesh Ramakrishnan, the learned Counsel for the 4th respondent.
2. Admittedly, the petitioners are ‘Melsanthi’ as well as ‘Keezhsanthi’ working in the Temple managed by the 4th respondent herein. The grievance of the petitioners is that they have not been extended the benefit of the pay revision granted by the State Government. The petitioners state that, during the pendency of the writ petition, the 4th respondent issued Ext.R4(h) communication dated 01.09.2022, virtually accepting the claim of the petitioners and advising that the pay revision granted by the State Government be extended to the petitioners as well. The learned Counsel for the petitioners fairly points out that the petitioners 2 to 5 have resigned from service and only the 1st petitioner is continuing in service.
In view of the contents of Ext.R4(h), I am of the opinion that it is for the Commissioner of the Malabar Devaswom Board to consider the advise of the 4th respondent and extend the benefits to the petitioners herein within a time frame.
Therefore, this writ petition would stand disposed of, by directing the 3rd respondent herein to consider Ext.R4(h) and pass consequential orders, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from today. It is made clear that the 3rd respondent requires to consider the case of the petitioners 2 to 5 with respect to their eligibility for arrears with respect to the contents of Ext.R4(h). Needless to state that the petitioners are required to be granted an opportunity of being heard in the matter.
