http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: STATE OF KERALA ETC.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM MANAGING COMMITTEE & ORS. ETC.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       18/11/1996

BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, G.B. PATTANAIK

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                             WITH         SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 23650 OF 1996                      [ CC  -  5886/96 ]                          O R D E R      SLP (C) NO.21792/96:      The grievance  in this  special leave  petition,  filed against the  order of  the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court, made  on July  2,  1996  in  CMP  No.31034/95  in  OP No.10608/93, is two-fold, namely the direction to sanction a sum  of   Rs.7,10,212/-  incurred   by  one  Shri  Raghavan, Administrator and  the direction to pay a sum of Rs.35,000/- being monetary  consideration for  the work done by Raghavan as Administrator in conducting the examinations.      Shri Y.R.  Reddy, learned Additional Solicitor General. contended that  the amount  of Rs.7,10,212/-  spent by  Shri Raghavan in  connection  with  conducting  the  examinations would be  dealt with  in accordance  with the administrative procedure prescribed  by  the  Dewaswom  Committee  in  that behalf and  the direction  for sanction would run counter to the administrative  procedure prescribed  in that behalf and it will create unnecessary complications in scrutinising the accounts and  passing the  bills towards the amount spent by Shri Raghavan. It is also assured by Shri V.R. Reddy that if the expenditure  has  been  spent  in  accordance  with  the requirements and  principles, the same will be sanctioned by the competent  authority in that behalf. We need not deal in that  behalf  at  length.  Suffice  it  to  state  that  the authority competent  to scrutinise the amount spent would go into the  matter and pass appropriate orders sanctioning the amount  spent   by  the   Administrator  in  conducting  the examinations.      With regard to the second aspect, namely, the direction to pay  monetary  consideration  in  a  sum  of  Rs.35,000/- towards the exemplary work done by Raghvan, we feel that the High Court,  Perhaps found it necessary to direct payment of the said amount in addition to commendation of the work done by  Raghavan.   It  being   a  discretion  exercised  in  an extraordinary situation  perhaps,  we  may  not  incline  to interfere with  the direction.  But we make it clear that it would not  be treated  as a precedent in every case wherever

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

an officer  on deputation does the work at the directions of the  Court;   he  would   also  be   entitled  to   monetary considerations in  addition to  the normal  service and  the salary  received  for  doing  that  service.  We  take  this decision for  the reason  that perhaps  the officer  did not bargain for  such direction  for payment  in  rendering  the service and  any notice to him would put him in embarrassing situation and  the Court  also will  not be in a position to say anything  when  the  matter  goes  on  notice.  In  this situation  we   are  not  inclined  to  interfere  with  the direction issued  by the Division Bench of the High Court in this behalf.      The petition  is accordingly  ordered  with  the  above observations.      IN SLP (C) NO. /93 (CC-5886/96 ):      Permission to file special leave petition is granted.      In this  matter, the  petitioner is  aggrieved  of  the observations made  by the  Division Bench  in the  aforesaid order. The  petitioner states  that this Court in Guruvayoor Devaswom  Managing   Committee  vs.   Chairman,   Guruvayoor Devaswom Managing  Committee & Ors. [ (1996) 7 SCC 505 ] has upheld the  action taken  by the  petitioner and, therefore, the observations made were not justified or warranted. Those observations came  to be  made without  any notice to him or hearing him.  We need  not pursue the matter at this end. It would be  open to  the petitioner  to make an application in the High  Court to  expunge the  remarks and  the High Court would deal with it accordingly.      The petition  is accordingly  dismissed with  the above liberty.