ORDER

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Advocate General assisted by the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for R1 & R2 and the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent temple.

2. The writ petitioner was employed as Record Clerk in the third respondent temple in the year 1997. He was promoted as Junior Assistant and then as Assistant. He was assigned work at Thriumarainathaswamy Temple at Thiruvathavoor. By the impugned order dated 11.08.2022, the petitioner had been transferred to Arulmigu Ramanathaswamy Thirukovil, Rameshwaram. The third respondent had also issued the relieving order. Since the relieving order alone was served on the petitioner, he was constrained to challenge the same as he was not furnished with the copy of the order issued by the Commissioner of HR & CE Department, Chennai. This Court while entertaining the writ petition had granted an order of interim stay on

16.08.2022. The order granting interim stay reads as follows:- “Under Rule 17 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Institutions Employees (Conditions of Service) Rules, 2020, the second respondent while passing the impugned order of transfer, requires to get mutual consent of the Executive Authority of the Temples between which the employee is transferred from service.

2. The impugned order does not reflect that such a consent was obtained from the Executive Authority of the Religious Institutions which is a mandatory requirement under Rule 17 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Institutions Employees (Conditions of Service) Rules, 2020. In this background, I am of the prima facie view that the order of transfer cannot be sustained. However, this aspect requires further deliberations. In view of the prima facie, there shall be an order of interim stay.”

Seeking to vacate the same, the temple had filed W.M.P.(MD)No.15108 of

2022.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner reiterated all the contentions set out in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and called upon this Court to set aside the impugned order. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner is an office bearer of the employees association and in that capacity, he filed W.P.(MD)No.2288 of 2022 questioning the amendment made to Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Institutions Employees (Conditions of Services) Rules, 2020 and the consequential guidelines issued by the Commissioner of HR & CE Department. The writ petition was dismissed on 28.04.2022 and he moved the Hon'ble Apex Court by filing SLP. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would allege that the impugned transfer order was a counter blast to the petition filed by the petitioner before the Apex Court. According to him, the impugned proceedings are vitiated by malice in law. He called upon this Court to allow the writ petition as prayed for.

4. Per contra, the learned Additional Advocate General as well as the learned counsel for the Temple submitted that the impugned orders do not warrant any interference.

5. I carefully considered the rival contentions and went through the materials on record.

6. Interim order was granted primarily for the reason that consent of the executive authority of Ramanathaswamy Temple was not obtained. Rule 17 of Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Institutions Employees (Conditions of Services)

Rules, 2020 reads as follows:--

“17.Transfers and Postings:- (1) The employees of religious institutions may be transferred to the entry level post from one religious institution to another religious institution having Executive Officer of the same grade based on the mutual consent of the Executive Authorities of the religious institutions by considering the objections of employees of the said religious institutions and subject to approval by the Commissioner.

Provided that the scale of pay and designation of the post are the same in both the religious institutions.

(2) An employee transferred from one religious institution to another rel