Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALEE KRISHNA S. WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 14TH PHALGUNA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 25371 OF 2015 PETITIONER: AJAYAKUMAR E.K. DEVASWOM OFFICER, SREE POORNATHRAYEESA TEMPLE, TRIPUNITHURA, RESIDING AT KRISHNAKRIPA, CHOTTANIKKARA P.O., ERNAKULAM - 682 312. BY ADVS. SMT.K.R.KRISHNAKUMARI SMT.P.V.RADHAMANI RESPONDENTS: 1 COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, DEVASWOM BUILDING, THRISSUR - 680 001. 2 THE SPECIAL DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER OFFICE OF THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, DEVASWOM BUILDING, THRISSUR - 680 001. 3 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (VALUABLES) OFFICE OF THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, DEVASWOM BUILDING, THRISSUR - 680 001.
4 THE DEVASWOM ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TRIPUNITHURA GROUP, THRIPUNITHURA- 682 301. 5 ADDL.R5 SMT.KOMALAM, HARICHANDANAM HOUSE, SANSKRIT COLLEGE ROAD, TRIPUNITHURA-682 301. 6 ADDL.R6 SRI.VASUDEVAN MOOTHATHU, ILAYIDATH ILLOM, KOTTAKKAKOM, TRIPUNITHURA-682 301. 7 ADDL.R7 SRI.M.MOHANAN MENOKKI [EXPIRED] MEPPARAMBATH HOUSE, PUNITHURA P.O., TRIPUNITHURA-682
301. [ADDL.R5 TO R7 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
8 ADDL.R8 SRI.SIVASANKARAN MENOKKI, MEPARAMBATH HOUSE, PUNITHURA.P.O., TRIPUNITHURA-682301 [ADDL.R8 IS THE LEGAL HEIR OF THE DECEASED 7TH RESPONDENT AS PER ORDER DATED 28/03/2023 IN I.A-1/2023 IN WP(C) 25371/2015] BY ADVS. SRI.KRISHNA MENON, SC, COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD L.RAJESH NARAYAN SRI.G.RAJAGOPAL, SC, COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD K.P.SUDHEER OTHER PRESENT: SRI. K. P. SUDHEER, SC, CDB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Muralee Krishna, J.
The petitioner who is the Devaswom Officer of Tripunithura Devaswom under the management of the 1st respondent Cochin Devaswom Board filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs: “a) To issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ,
order or direction quashing Exts.P7, P8 and P14 to the
extent of fixing the liability of one fourth of Rs.28,650/- for the loss of articles which have not yet been handed over to the petitioner as unsustainable and in violation of the petitioner's fundamental rights under Articles 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India since those items were lost prior to 27.06.2006, i.e., the date of taking over charge by the petitioner as the Devaswom Officer, Tripunithura Group; b) To issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ,
order or direction quashing Clause (7) of Ext.P7 to the extent
of fixing the liability for the loss of articles which have not yet been handed over to the petitioner as unsustainable since those items were lost prior to the date of taking over charge by the petitioner as the Devaswom Officer, Tripunithura Group; c) To declare that the petitioner is not liable to discharge the liability of one fourth of Rs.28,650/- for the loss of articles which have not yet been handed over to the petitioner as unsustainable and in violation of the petitioner's fundamental
rights under Articles 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India since those items were lost prior to the date of taking over charge by the petitioner as the Devaswom Officer, Tripunithura Group;
d) To issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order
or direction quashing Ext.P6 to the extent of fixing the liability of Rs.33,884.85 for the loss of articles which have not yet been handed over to the petitioner and which were lost long prior to the date of taking over charge by the petitioner as the Devaswom Officer, Tripunithura Group as unsustainable and in violation of the petitioner's fundamental rights under Articles 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India. e) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ,
order or direction directing the respondents 1 to 3 to refund
an amount of Rs.33,884.85 which was alleged as liability and compelled to be deposited by the petitioner as per Ext.P5 series receipts; f) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ,
order or direction directing the respondents 1 to 3 to prepare
and maintain the Pandam Pathram Register and Major Eradavu Register in Sree Poornathrayeesa Temple, Tripunithura, after rectifying the anomalies in those Registers, in compliance with the direction of the 1 st respondent in Ext.P2 order; g) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ,
order or direction directing the respondents 1 to 3 to prepare
and maintain Thanathu Register in Sree Poornathrayeesa Temple, Tripunithura.
h) To declare that the petitioner is not liable to discharge any liability in respect of the loss of any movable and immovable properties under the Tripunithura Devaswom Group due to the anomalies in the Pandam Pathram Register and Major Eradavu Register in Sree Poornathrayeesa Temple, Tripunithura and due to the absence of Thanathu Register in the Tripunithura Devaswom Group, the charge of which have not yet been handed over to the petitioner”.
2. The petitioner entered service as Devaswom
Assistant/LDC under the 1st respondent Cochin Devaswom Board in Chottanikkara Devaswom on 06.11.1996. He was promoted and posted in the grade of Devaswom Officer at Chottanikkara Devaswom on 01.04.2002. He took charge as Devaswom Officer in Tripunithura Devaswom on 28.06.2006. Sree Poornathrayeesa Temple is the only temple under Tripunithura Devaswom. Immediately on taking charge, the petitioner noted several anomalies in the Pandam Pathram Register (‘P.P. Register’ in short) and Major Eradavu Register (‘M.E. Register’ in short) kept in the temple and by way of Ext.P1 letter dated 31.07.2006 he informed these anomalies to the 4th respondent Devaswom Assistant Commissioner. According to the petitioner, there are three P.P. Registers in Tripunithura Devaswom. They are (i) P.P. Register in the custody of the Assistant Commissioner, Tripunithura Devaswom in which the articles referred to therein are in the joint custody of Assistant Commissioner, Devaswom Officer, Moothathu and Menokki in the temple, (ii) P.P. Register in the custody of Devaswom Officer; and (iiii) P.P. Register in the custody of Mel Santhi. As per Ext.P2 proceedings dated 28.09.2006, the 1st respondent authorized the Pandam Pathram Special Officer who is at present re-designated as Assistant Commissioner (Valuables) (3rd respondent) to conduct an inspection on the anomalies reported in Ext.P1. But no inspection was conducted by the 3rd respondent till date. 2.1. While so, the Test Audit of Receipt Accounts of Tripunithra Devaswom for the year 2005-2006 was conducted from the office of Deputy Director of Local Fund Audit, Cochin Devaswom Board, Thrissur, with effect from 23.05.2007. As per Ext.P3 audit notes of the Test Audit it was found that the charge of the items in P.P. Registers and M.E. Register were not handed over to the petitioner by his predecessors and there are anomalies in those Registers. By Ext.P4 letter dated 18.01.2008, the petitioner requested the 2nd respondent Special Devaswom Commissioner to issue orders for repairing the gold Kolam and gold Golaka which are being used for the temple festivals in the months of Vrischikam and Kumbam. The said letter was annexed with Ext.P4(a) letter dated 15.01.2008 of the Thanthri of the temple. Pursuant to Ext.P4 and P4(a), the 3rd respondent inspected the gold Kolam and Golaka and also other items in the P.P. Register and found that certain items lost weight and some items are missing. This Court interfered in the above issue and ordered to repair the gold Kolam and gold Golaka based on the report of the observer appointed by this court. 2.2. In the year 2010, the then Pandam Patram Special Officer inspected the articles mentioned in the P.P. Registers and found certain articles missing. As orally directed by the 3 rd respondent, in order to rectify the P.P. Register and M.E Register which are in the custody of the Devaswom Officer, the petitioner deposited some amounts and was issued with Ext.P5(a) to P5(e) receipts for a total sum of Rs.33,884.85/-.
2.3. Thereafter the 2nd respondent issued Ext.P6 order
dated 19.05.2010 regarding the inspection of P.P. Register in the Devaswom and exonerated the petitioner from the liability of missing articles after recording the payments effected by the petitioner by Ext.P5 series. But on 19.05.2010 the 2nd respondent issued Ext.P7 order also fixing the liability of missing articles referred to in the P.P Register which is in the joint custody of Assistant Commissioner, Devaswom Officer, Moothathu and Menokki. In that order, the 2nd respondent found that the Devaswom Officer is solely responsible for the missing articles in the M.E. Register. On 19.05.2010 itself the 2nd respondent issued Ext.P8 notice fixing the liability of missing articles assessed as per Ext.P7 to all the four joint custodians including the petitioner. On receipt of Exts.P7 and P8, the petitioner submitted Ext.P9 explanation dated 03.06.2010 producing therewith Ext.P9(a) photocopies of relevant pages of P.P Register. From the said document, it is evident that the key of the Kallara Bhandaram which is in the joint custody of the aforesaid four persons was handed over to the then Devaswom Officer only on 31.10.2002 and thereafter the key was not handed over to the successor. 2.4. On 07.04.2011 this Court passed Ext.P10 order dated 07.04.2011 in I.A. No. 716 of 2011 in an unnumbered R.P. of 2011 in DBA No. 11 of 2011 directing that the petitioner and the Assistant Engineer shall not be entrusted with any other official duties or shall not be transferred until the renovation work of the Sreekovil of Sree Poornathrayeesa temple is completed. By Ext.P11 order dated 27.04.2011, the 2nd respondent directed the petitioner to participate in the discussion in respect of rewriting of the P.P. Register in the temple to be held in the chamber of the 2nd respondent on 03.05.2011. After discussion on that date, the 2 nd respondent passed Ext.P12 order, but no decision has been taken on the rewriting of the P.P. Register. Though the petitioner sent several reminders to the respondents, no action has been taken to implement Ext.P2 order and to rewrite the Registers in the temple. 2.5. On 11.11.2013 the petitioner submitted Ext.P13 representation before the President and Members of the 1 st respondent, requesting to take steps to rectify the existing anomalies and rewrite all the Registers. But without considering the explanations of the petitioner as well as the other joint custodians and without hearing the affected parties including the petitioner, the 2nd respondent passed Ext.P14 order dated 26.12.2014 fixing the liability of Rs.28,650/- to the four joint custodians and directing them, including the petitioner, to remit one-fourth of that amount. On receipt of Ext.P14, the petitioner submitted Ext.P15 representation to the 2nd respondent. Thereafter the petitioner approached this Court with the above writ petition.
3. On 19.08.2015 when this writ petition came up for
consideration, the learned Standing Counsel for Cochin Devaswom Board took notice for the respondents. This Court granted an interim order staying all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P14 for effecting the recovery of one-fourth of Rs.28,650/- from the petitioner for the loss of the articles, on condition that the petitioner provides fixed deposit receipt for Rs.28,650/- drawn on his name in a Nationalised Bank of his choice and lien marked in favour of Cochin Devaswom Board within a period of two months, before the Registrar General of this Court.
4. On 15.10.2015 as per the order in I.A. No.12599 of 2015,
the interim order imposing a condition to provide a fixed deposit receipt for Rs.28,650/- by the petitioner was modified to the effect that the petitioner has to produce a fixed deposit receipt for Rs.7200/- within a period of three weeks. In pursuance to the said direction, the petitioner produced the fixed deposit receipt along with a memo and it was kept in the safe custody of the Registrar General as item No.946 which was renewed from time to time.
5. By I.A. No.1 of 2022, the petitioner sought impleading of
additional respondents 5 to 7. When notice was issued to the proposed additional respondents it was reported that the notice issued to the 7th respondent was returned with an endorsement 'deceased’. Thereafter the petitioner filed I.A. No.1 of 2023 seeking to implead additional 8th respondent stating that he is competent to represent the estate of the proposed additional 7 th respondent who is no more. As per the order dated 28.03.2023 in I.A. No.1 of 2023, additional respondents 5 to 8 were impleaded in the writ petition. It was ordered that whether or not all the legal heirs of the deceased 7th respondent need to be impleaded is a matter to be decided at subsequent stages of the proceedings.
6. By I.A. No.7629 of 2017 dated 19.05.2017, the petitioner produced Exts. P17 to P19 documents.
7. The 1st respondent Cochin Devaswom Board filed a counter affidavit dated 11.02.2025 opposing the averments in the writ petition. Paragraphs 3 and 4 of that counter affidavit read thus:
“3. Chapter 4 of the Devaswom Manual deals with the registers to be maintained by the 1st respondent. Clause 16 deals with Major Eradavu Register. In this regard true copy of the relevant pages of Chapter 4 of the Devaswom Manual is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R1 (a). According to the petitioner, when he assumed charge as the Devaswom Officer of Thripunithura devaswom he realised that the registers kept in the temple had not been properly maintained and several anomalies were existing in the registers. It was in that circumstances the petitioner submitted Exhibit P1 letter dated 31.07.2006. The contention of the petitioner that no inspection was conducted by the 3rd respondent regarding the anomalies alleged in respect of the registers maintained in the office of Sree Poornathrayeesha Temple is incorrect. During the pendency of the above writ petition, the Honourable Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) No. 7947/2018 appointed the then Registrar General of this Honourable Court to prepare an inventory of the valuables in the temple and a detailed report and inventory was also submitted before the Honourable Supreme Court.
4. According to the petitioner, the predecessor of the
petitioner has not handed over the items mentioned in the registers maintained in the temple in question. The petitioner concedes that by Exts. P5(a) to P5 (e) receipts an amount of 33,884.85/- was remitted by him. The contention of the petitioner that by Ext.P6 order dated 19.05.2010 he
was exonerated from the liability of missing articles is incorrect. Exhibit P6 would show that in view of the remittances effected by Exhibits P5 (a) to (e), the 2 nd respondent passed Exhibit P6 order. Exhibit P7 order was issued in respect of the missing articles which was in the joint custody of the Assistant Commissioner, Moothath, Menokki and the petitioner (Devaswom Officer). The Devaswom Officer cannot shirk his responsibility in respect of the articles included in the Major Eradavu register. Ext.P8 notice dated 19.05.2010 was issued to the petitioner and other persons responsible for the missing of articles. It is also alleged that no personal hearing was afforded to the petitioner before issuing Ext.P14 order dated 26/12/2014. Ext.P15 is the representation submitted by the petitioner on receipt of Ext.P14 order. The contention of the petitioner that the amount deposited in terms of Ext.P5 (a) to (e) receipts are liable to be refunded is unsustainable. It is submitted that there is absolutely no illegality or arbitrariness in issuing Exts. P7, P8 and P14 orders. The said orders were issued after considering the explanations offered by the petitioner. So, the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief and the writ petition may be dismissed with costs.”
8. To the counter affidavit filed by the 1st respondent, the petitioner filed a reply affidavit producing therewith Exts. P20 to P28 documents.
9. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for Cochin Devaswom Board and its officials.
10. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
charge of the items in P.P Register and M.E. Register were not handed over to the petitioner at the time of his taking charge as a Devaswom Officer in the Tripunithura Devaswom on 28.06.2006 which was mentioned by him in Ext.P1 letter filed before the Devaswom Assistant Commissioner at the earliest point of time, after taking the charge. In fact, after 31.10.2002, nobody verified the Registers as evident from Ext.P9(a) the relevant pages of the P.P. Register dated 31.10.2002. The learned counsel brought the attention of this Court to Ext.P16 the relevant pages of M.E. Register wherein some items were entered as not entrusted and argued that the petitioner who was not entrusted with the properties entered in the P.P. Register and M.E. Register cannot be
held liable for the missing of the items which occurred prior to his
taking over the charge.
11. On the other hand the learned Standing Counsel for the
Cochin Devaswom Board submitted that the missing of items were found out at the time of audit of the accounts of the Tripunithura Devaswom for the year 2005-06. The reduction in the weight or missing of some items including gold and silver were mentioned in Ext.P3 report. If the items were not handed over to the petitioner, he could have refused to take charge of the Registers concerned.
12. The petitioner is the Devaswom Officer of Tripunithura
Devaswom under the Tripunithura Group with effect from 28.06.2006. According to the petitioner at the time of his taking charge as the Devaswom Officer, he noted anomalies in the P.P. Register and M.E. Register kept in the Sree Poornathrayeesha Temple. He brought the missing items to the notice of the 4 th respondent by Ext.P1 letter dated 31.07.2006. Though, by Ext.P2 proceedings dated 28.09.2006, the 1st respondent directed the 3rd respondent to conduct an inspection of the P.P. Register and M.E. Register in the Tripunitura Devaswom and to submit a report before the 1st respondent, the same has not been complied till date. It is also the case of the petitioner that in the year 2010, as directed by the 3rd respondent, he deposited a sum of Rs.33,884.85/- in order to rectify the anomalies in the P.P. Register and M.E. Register. However, the 2nd respondent issued Ext.P7
order dated 19.05.2010 fixing the liability of missing articles
referred to the P.P Register in the joint custody of the Assistant Commissioner, the petitioner, Moothathu and Menokki. Though the petitioner submitted Ext.P13 representation dated 11.11.2013
before the 1st respondent to rectify the anomalies, Ext.P14 order
dated 26.12.2014 was issued by the 2nd respondent fixing the liability of Rs.28,650/- to the four custodians of the Registers concerned. According to the petitioner he was not heard before passing such an order by the 2nd respondent. But, according to the respondents, the petitioner cannot escape from the liability of the missing articles which was statutorily in his custody after taking charge as a Devawom Officer.
13. During the course of arguments, the learned Standing
Counsel for the Cochin Devaswom Board invited our attention to Articles 137 and 138 of Chapter X of the Devaswom manual which stipulates the manner in which the Nadavaravu articles have to be dealt with. Chapter X of the Devaswom manual deals with other items of Devaswom receipts. Articles 137 and 138 deal with Nadavaravu. They read thus: “137. Nadavaravu-In almost all the temples articles such as
gold and silver ornaments, bell-metal articles such as lamps, etc., perishable articles including bulls, cows, calves, goats and other live-stock are offered as vazhivadus, which are credited in the Nadavaravu register in Form No. XXV Appendix XIV to be maintained in each Devaswam. In some cases, the donors express a wish that the articles offered by them may be preserved for the daily use in the temple without their being sold in auction. In such cases, they are preserved, if unobjectionable, for the use of the temple according to the wishes of the donors and are taken to the register of ornaments and vessels (vide article 320) maintained in each Devaswam in Form No. XXVI Appendix XIV. The other articles as are not required for the temple use, are disposed of in auction and the sale proceeds credited to the Devaswam. Such of the articles of Nadavaravu as can be used for nithyanidanam expenditure may be utilised for such purposes and the cost credited by adjustment. The disposal of these articles shall be as follows:-
138. Sale of Nadavaravu articles.-Nadavaravu articles
belonging to Devaswams may be classified under two heads- Major and Minor. All the articles of gold, silver, bell-metal and precious stones may be classed as Major and all the other articles as Minor. Explanation,-Ornaments and vessels made of copper, brass, iron and other articles and all kinds of furniture and other articles made of wood and perishables are to be included in the latter class. 'Perishables' means articles which are subject to damage or decay, e. g., all sorts of fruits and other
vegetable stuff, silk, cloth, sugar and molasses and also include bulls, cows, calves, goats and other live-stock; but do not include elephants.
1. MAJOR ARTICLES
List of all articles of gold, silver, bell-metal and precious stones received in a year to be disposed of should be submitted to the Diwan not later than the 1st of Thulam of the succeeding year for sanction. When sanction is received the Devaswam Commissioner should arrange to collect the articles to be sold in different centres according to the importance of the locality for the sale of articles and notify in the Cochin Government Gazette a month at least in advance of the dates and places of the sale and also the conditions of the sale. The sales should be conducted by the Devaswam Commissioner on the dates fixed in the notification and the facts reported to the Diwan with the sale lists for confirmation. When the sales are confirmed by the Diwan, the articles should be weighed and handed over to the bidders and the sale proceeds realised and remitted into the Treasury then and there. Particulars of remittance into the Treasury should also be reported to the Diwan. Such of the articles of Nadavaravu which should at the donor's request be preserved may be ordered by the Commissioner to be preserved in the Devaswams and these articles should be entered as such in the Registers of ornaments and vessels (Article 320) maintained in the Department.
2. MINOR ARTICLES.
Ornaments, vessels, etc., of copper, wood and other materials not classified under major articles received as Nadavaravu in a year in the several Devaswams should be duly listed by the Assistant Commissioner or the Deputy Tahsildar of Cranganur, as the case may be, and the lists together with separate lists of other useless and unserviceable articles belonging to each Group to be sold should be submitted to the Devaswam Commissioner for sanctioning the same, not later than the 1st of Thulam of the succeeding year. After the receipt of the sanction of the Commissioner the articles as per the list may be sold in public auction by the Assistant Commissioners or the Deputy Tahsildar of Cranganur, as the case may be, and the results reported to the Commissioner with the sale-lists for confirmation. After the sales are confirmed the articles should be handed over to the bidders and the sale amount realised and remitted into the Treasury and the fact reported to the Commissioner. All-perishable articles including bulls, cows, calves, goats and other live-stock will be disposed of then and there in public auction by the local Devaswom officers to the best advantage and the sale proceeds realised by them and credited to the accounts and the sale list submitted to the Commissioner for confirmation through the immediate supervising officers. After the sales are confirmed the Assistant Commissioner or the Deputy Tahsildar, as the case may be, should verify the remittance of the amounts into
the Treasury. Note,-A ledger of all articles received should be maintained in Form No I Appendix X and the monthly totals and progressive totals struck signed by the officers. This will be the basis for transfer of charge which should be recorded then and there. Disposal should be noted in this in detail and checked and attested by the Assistant Commissioner and the balance struck”.
14. As per the Devaswom manual, the Register of
Ornaments and vessels to be preserved have to be maintained in form No. XXVI-Appendix XIV. Similarly, the Nadavaravu items have to be entered in Form No.1-Appendix X. According to the Devaswom Board, there is flow in the management of the Nadavaravu articles and hence some of them were found missing in the registers concerned and the persons who are the custodians of these registers including the petitioner are liable for the missing articles. While going through Exts. P7 and P14 orders of the 2nd respondent we notice that those orders were passed without giving an opportunity to the petitioner to put forward his contentions before the 2nd respondent. During the course of arguments, the learned Standing Counsel for the Cochin Devaswom Board invited our attention to the judgment dated 20.06.2014 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 2978 of 2013 which is a writ petition filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Tripunithura Group who is one among the four persons who were found responsible for the missing of valuables, complaining about non-disbursal of DCRG, wherein this Court directed the 1st respondent to release the DCRG to the petitioner therein retaining a sum of Rs.7163/- deposited by her. In that judgment, this court
held that if in a detailed enquiry, it was ultimately found that the
petitioner therein was not at all responsible for the loss, then she is entitled to claim the amount retained by the Board. It was further directed that the enquiry shall be completed within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.
15. Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and submissions made at the Bar, we are of the view that Ext.P14
order of the 2nd respondent finding the petitioner and other three
custodians of the valuables as responsible for the missing items
worth Rs.28,650/- is liable to be set aside, since the said order
was passed without hearing the petitioner and others. In such circumstances, we dispose of this writ petition by setting aside Ext.P14 order dated 26.12.2014 passed by the 2nd respondent and direct the 2 nd respondent to decide the matter afresh after giving an opportunity to the petitioner and other affected parties to put forward their contentions on merit, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that the petitioner can submit fresh representation before the 2nd respondent explaining his defence. The deposit made by the petitioner in pursuance to the direction of this Court shall be subject to the decision that would be taken by the 2nd respondent. Sd/- ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE Sd/- MURALEE KRISHNA S., JUDGE sks APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25371/2015 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Renewed Fixed Renewed Fixed Deposit Receipt Deposit Receipt Renewed FD Receipt Renewal of FD Receipt deposited with Registrar General RESPONDENT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R 1 ( a ) True copy of the relevant pages of Chapter 4 of the Devaswom Manual PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit-P20 True copy of the relevant pages of Chapter 4 of the Devaswom Manual issued by the 1st respondent in the year 2014 Exhibit-P21 True copy of the Judgment of this Hon’ble Court dated 27.11.2017 in WP(C)No.35340/2014 Exhibit-P22 True copy of the Order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 10.09.2018 in SLP(C)No.7947/2018 Exhibit-P23 True copy of the Order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 04.02.2019 in SLP(C)No.7947/2018 Exhibit-P24 True copy of the Order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 26.11.2021 in SLP(C)No.7947/2018 Exhibit-P25 True copy of the Order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 24.01.2022 in SLP(C)No.7947/2018 Exhibit-P26 True copy of the Order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 04.08.2022 in SLP(C)No.7947/2018 Exhibit-P27 True copy of the Order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 19.01.2024 in SLP(C)No.7947/2018 Exhbit-P28 True copy of the Order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 28.01.2025 in SLP(C)No.7947/2018
EXHIBIT -P10- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 07.04.2011 IN I.A.NO.716/2011 IN R.P. NO.OF 2011 IN DBA.11/2011
EXHIBIT-P11- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.A9.2467/08 DATED 27.04.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT-P12- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.A9.2467/08 DATED 23.06.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-P13- TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 11.11.2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE PRESIDENT AND MEMBERS OFTHE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-P14- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDERNO.A9.2467/08 DATED 26.12.2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-P3-TRUE COPY OF THE NOTES OF AUDIT OF RECEIPT ACCOUNTS OF TRIPUNITHURA DEVASWOM FOR THE YEAR 2005-06 WAS CONDUCTED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LOCAL FUND AUDIT DATED 09/07/2007.
EXHIBIT-P16- TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE MAJOR ERADAVU REGISTER EXHIBIT-P1-TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P2-TRUE COPY OF THE PROEEDINGS DATED 28/09/2006 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-P4-TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT -P15- TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-P4(A)-TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THANTHRI DATED 15/01/2008. EXHIBIT-P5(B)-TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO. 4173 DATED 04/03/2010 FOR RS. 4,284/- EXHIBIT-P5(B)-TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO. 4174 DATED 04/03/2010 FOR RS.24,392.25 EXHIBIT-P5(C)-TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO. 4175 DATED 04/03/2010 FOR RS. 450/- EXHIBIT-P5(D)-TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO. 4176 DATED 04/03/2010 FOR RS.2,346.60 EXHIBIT-P5(E)-TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO. 4183 DATED 24/03/2010 FOR RS.4,284/- EXHIBIT-P6-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. A9- RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P7-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. A9- RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P8-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. A9- RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P9-TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION DATED 03/06/2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P9(A)-TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOCOPIES OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE P.P. REGISTER DATED 31.10.2002
EXHIBIT P17-TRUE COPY OF ORDER
NO.A1.9991/15 DATED 18.09.2015 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-P18-TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION TO EXT.P17 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FOURTH REPSONDENT ON 30.12.2015 EXHIBIT P19 - TRUE COP OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS THROUGH PROPER CHANNEL ON 12.5.2017