Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA MONDAY, THE30H DAY OF SEPTEMBER20138TH ASWINA, 1935 WP(C).No. 25588 of 2012 (W) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------- 1. T.N.CHANDRASEKHARA MARAR S/O.A.K.NARAYAN KURUP, THRIKKAMPURATH, THURUTHIKKARA PANAGARAPPALLY, MULANTHURUTHI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
2. T.K.SOMAN, S/OT.K.KUTTAPPAN, THADATHIL HOUSE, THURUTHIKKARA PANAGARAPPALLY, MULANTHURUTHI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.V.JAYAKUMAR NAMBOODIRI RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THRSISSUR.
2. CONTROL INSPECTOR, COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, THRISSUR.
3. P.G.GODAN NAMPOOTHIRIPPAD, TRUSTEE, THURUTHIKKARA DEVASWOM, PADUTHOL MANA PAINGARAPPILLY P.O., MULANTHURUTHI ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 314. (*) Addl.R4.PRESIDENT N.S.S. TALUK UNION, KANAYANNUR TALUK, TRIPUNITHURA. (*) Addl.R5.PRESIDENT SREE MAHAVISHNU KSHETHRA SAMITHY, THURUTHIKKARA MULANTHURUTHI.P.O., 682314. (*) Addl.R6.PRESIDENT BHAGAVATHY SEVA SANGHOM MATTAPPILLY KAVU BHAGAVATHI KSHETHRAM PAINGARAPPILLY.P.O., MULANTHURUTHI - 682314. (*) ADDL. R4 TO R6 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER
DATED2205/2013 IN IA No.6584/2013. R1,2 BY ADV. SMT.P.K.RADHIKA R1,R2 BY ADV. SRI.KRISHNA MENON, SC, COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD R3 BY ADV. SMT.M.R.SREELATHA R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.P.SUDHEER ADDL.4 BY ADV. SRI.S.PRASANTH ADDL.4 BY ADV. SRI.JAGADEESH LAKSHMAN R5 BY ADV. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ R5 BY ADV. SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY ADDL6BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SUDHEENDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON3009-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 25588 of 2012 (W) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED55/2012. EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED168/2012. EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.E.9834/2008 DATED286/2012. EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF CONTROLLED INSTITUTION OF THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD EXHIBIT P5. TRUE COPY OF THE ACCOUNTS SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD EXHIBIT P6. TRUE COPY OF THE RESIGNATION LETTER DT.16.5.2010 OF THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : EXT.R3(a) TRUE COPY OF LEASE DEED DT.7/12/2002 EXECUTED BETWEEN3D RESPONDENT AND NSS KARAYOGAM UNION. EXT.R3(b) TRUE COPY OF DEED DT.1/4/09 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE WRIT PETITIONER, THE THEN SECRETARY OF THURUTHIKKARA MAHAVISHNU KSHETHRA SEVA SAMITHI AND THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT.R3(c) TRUE COPY OF THE DEED EXECUTED BETWEEN THE3D RESPONDENT AND THE OFFICE BEARERS OF MATTAPPILLY KAVU BHAGAVATHI SEVA SANGHAM DT.31/5/2012. EXT.R5(a) TRUE COPY OF THE INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT OF THE SREE MAHAVISHNU KSHETHRA SEVA SAMITHI FOR201213. EXT.R5(b) TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE SAMITHI DT.7/4/2013 EXT.R5(c) TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE GENERAL BODY MEETING OF THE SAMITHI DT.21/4/2013. EXT.R6(a) TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY THE MANAGING TRUSTEE AND SANGAM ON143/1986 EXT.R6(b) TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY THE MANAGING TRUSTEE AND SANGAM ON2406/1999 EXT.R6(c) TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY THE MANAGING TRUSTEE AND SANGAM ON3105/2002. ms \\True copy// P.A to Judge T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & B.KEMAL PASHA, JJ.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C).No.25588/2012 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 30th day of September, 2013
JUDGMENT
Ramachandran Nair, J.
The petitioners have approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: "i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writs or direction, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to implement the directions in Ext.P3 within a time frame. ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writs or direction, directing the first respondent to consider Ext.P2 and make an enquiry about the violation of Section 86 of the Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950 with respect of the Thuruthikkara Devaswom, after giving an opportunity to the first petitioner to be heard in person and to produce evidence and pass orders within a time frame. iii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writs or direction, directing the first respondent to see that the third respondent complies with the provisions of Section 79 of the Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950 with respect to Thuruthikkara Devaswom and its Keezhedams. W.P.(C).No.25588/2012 -:2:- 2. Going by the averments in the writ petition, the first petitioner is a devotee of Mattappillikavu and Thuruthikkara Mahavishnu Temples. The second petitioner is also a devotee of Mattappillikavu Devi. According to the petitioners, Thuruthikkara Krishnapuram Temple is now serial No.270 in the list of controlled Institutions under Cochin Devaswom Board, Mattappillikavu and Kolakkulanagara Temples are Keezhedams of Thuruthikkara Temple. The Temple belongs to Paduthol Mana near Mulanthuruthy and the third respondent is the present trustee. As per Settlement Award dated 05/03/1958 of Paduthol Mana, the administration of Thuruthikkara Devaswom was vested with the first branch of Paduthol Mana. They have also traced out later developments and the substantial contention is that being a controlled institution, the Cochin Devaswom Board should be directed to implement Ext.P3 and should inquire into the complaint raised in Ext.P2. W.P.(C).No.25588/2012 -:3:- 3. The contesting respondents have filed separate affidavits and we have heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Board also. As far as the stand taken by the trustee of the Temple is concerned, the Temple properties described in the writ petition are vested with the third respondent as per Arbitration Award dated 19/11/1953 and by Partition Deed No.1345/1958. Because of old age, he is not in a position to personally supervise the administration of these Temples and certain administrative changes have been made in the matter. The substantial contention raised is that time to time accounts have been prepared and are being submitted before the General Body meeting of the devotees concerned and the contention raised by the petitioners that affairs are vested with the Cochin Devaswom Board is disputed. It is also stated that he has not assigned any land to anyone.
4. The other contesting respondents have also filed counter affidavits in the matter. W.P.(C).No.25588/2012 -:4:- 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners by relying upon Section 86 Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950 (for short, the 'Act') submitted that being a controlled Institution, it is upto the Board to see that affairs are conducted properly and in terms of the provisions of the Act.
6. There are serious contest with regard to the above arguments by the learned counsel for the respondents. Prima facie it appears that the Temple is established by a family as clear from the averments in the counter affidavit filed by the third respondent where an Arbitration Award dated 19/11/1953 and the Partition Deed No.1345/1958 are mentioned. Therefore, it will require assessment of various facts and materials and at this stage, it will be premature to conclude either way. Even though there is a definition of Institution under Section 61(6) of the Act, it cannot be conclusively stated at this stage whether this Temple comes within the definition of Institution under Section 61(6) of the Act also. W.P.(C).No.25588/2012 -:5:- 7. Therefore, we refrain from issuing any direction as sought for by the petitioners. It is upto the petitioners to approach other forums or the Civil Court as the case may be. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. Sd/- (T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) Sd/- (B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE) ms