Re-appointing Retired Employees Temporarily Is 'Patently Illegal'; Boards Must Report Vacancies To Recruitment Board: Kerala High Court - 2025-02-27

Law Updates Made Simple.

Kerala High Court Slams Devaswom Board for "Patently Illegal" Re-appointment of Retired Staff

Ernakulam: The Kerala High Court has strongly condemned the practice of the Travancore Devaswom Board (TDB) re-appointing its retired employees on a temporary basis, labeling the procedure "per se arbitrary and patently illegal." A Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishna S. has restrained the Board from making such appointments and directed that any temporary hiring must be done through the Employment Exchange until permanent recruitment is completed.

The ruling came in a suo motu case initiated by the court based on a complaint from a citizen, who alleged that Devaswom Boards were bypassing the Kerala Devaswom Recruitment Board and appointing unqualified or retired individuals.

The Case in Brief

The High Court took up the matter after receiving a complaint regarding the Travancore Devaswom Board's decision to fill the post of Assistant Machine Operator in its printing press by re-hiring a retired employee, Sri. R. Krishnakumar. The complaint highlighted that such actions deny opportunities to unemployed youth registered with the Employment Exchange.

Board's Justification and Court's Rebuttal

The Travancore Devaswom Board, in its defense, filed an affidavit stating that Sri. Krishnakumar was re-appointed on a temporary basis due to his 20 years of experience and the urgent need for printing work during the Sabarimala festival season. The Board argued his expertise was crucial for the smooth functioning of the press and that steps were now being taken to report the vacancies to the Recruitment Board.

However, the High Court was unconvinced by these arguments. The judgment noted with disapproval that although the vacancy for Assistant Machine Operator arose on May 1, 2024, the Board only reported it to the Recruitment Board on February 20, 2025—a delay of nearly nine months.

In a pivotal observation, the Court stated:

"When direct recruitment to various posts in the Devaswom Board Press can be made only by appointing candidates advised by the 3rd respondent Devaswom Recruitment Board, there is absolutely no justification on the part of the 2nd respondent Travancore Devaswom Board for permitting retired employees of the Board to continue in the very same post, on the strength of appointments on temporary basis... Such a procedure is per se arbitrary and patently illegal."

The bench emphasized that the Board should have anticipated the vacancy and reported it well in advance, considering the time-consuming nature of the official recruitment process.

Final Decision and Its Implications

Disposing of the petition, the High Court laid down a clear directive for the Travancore Devaswom Board:

1. Stop Re-hiring Retirees: The Board is restrained from appointing its retired employees on a temporary basis to fill existing vacancies.
2. Follow Proper Channels: For any immediate temporary needs, the Board must appoint candidates from the list provided by the concerned Employment Exchange.
3. Prioritize Permanent Recruitment: This temporary arrangement is only permissible until a permanent candidate is advised by the Kerala Devaswom Recruitment Board.

This judgment serves as a significant check on the ad-hoc appointment practices within the Devaswom Board, reinforcing the mandate of the Kerala Devaswom Recruitment Board and upholding the principles of fair and transparent recruitment in public employment.