Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 8TH MAGHA, 1943 PETITIONER/S: ANIL KUMAR AGED 46 YEARS S/O.,APPUKUTTAN ACHARI, NADAYIL VADAKKATHIL, MULANKADAKAM WARD, WEST VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK, KOLLAM DIST., PIN - 691 012. BY ADVS. K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN BHANU THILAK RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS:
1 N.SIVAPRASAD PRESIDENT, SREE MULANKADAKAM DEVI TEMPLE BHARANA SAMITHI, MULANKADAKAM, KOLLAM DIST., PIN - 691 012. 2 NADARAJAN SECRETARY, SREE MULANKADAKAM DEVI TEMPLE BHARANA SAMITHI, MULANKADAKAM, KOLLAM DIST., PIN - 691 012. 3 PUDIYA PALAM MOHAN, MEMBER, SREE MULANKADAKAM DEVI TEMPLE BHARANA SAMITHI, MULANKADAKAM, KOLLAM DIST., PIN - 691 012. 4 VIJAYAN BABU, MEMBER, SREE MULANKADAKAM DEVI TEMPLE BHARANA SAMITHI, MULANKADAKAM, KOLLAM DIST., PIN - 691 012. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
28.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ..2.. ,
JUDGMENT
This is an Original Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
2. The prayers in the Original Petition are as follows:- “i) Issue an order setting aside Ext.P6 order and dismissing
Ext.P4 application. ii) Issue an order staying the operation of Ext.P6 order till the disposal of the above OP(C). iii) Issue an order directing the District Judges Court, Kollam to dispose of Ext.P1 I.A., in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. iv) Issue such other order or direction this Hon‘ble Court deem fit and proper to grant.“
3. The petitioner is a devotee of Sree
Mulankadakam Devi Temple, Kollam. The temple is being managed by Sree Mulankadakam Devi Temple Trust, a public Trust. The impugned order, Ext.P6, arose from an application, I.A.No. 8/2021 in O.S.No.97/1099 ME of the District Court, Kollam filed by the office bearers of Sree ..3.. , Mulankadakam Devi Temple Bharana Samithy, the respondents herein. In the application, the respondents pleaded that in a fire mishap that occurred on 23.01.2021 at around 03.000hrs a part of the building was destroyed, causing substantial loss to the temple structures. A ‘devaprasnam’ was conducted thereafter. Consequently, a General Body meeting of the Temple Trust members was convened, in which it was resolved to renovate the temple structures. A Renovation Committee was also constituted. In the above circumstances, they sought sanction of the District Court to carry out the renovation process by filing I.A.No.8/2021.
4. The application was resisted by the petitioner
herein before the District Court. The petitioner contended that the present temple administration committee has no locus standi to file an application seeking permission to proceed with the renovation works. He also submitted that the loss that happened to the ..4.. , temple due to the fire mishap stemmed from the failure of the incumbent Managing Committee to foresee such an incident. He also contended that the term of office of the present Managing Committee expired.
5. After considering the rival contentions, the
District Court, Kollam permitted the present Managing Committee of the temple to proceed with the renovation. In paragraph 6 of the impugned order, the court below has recorded the following reasoning:-
"The necessity of the instant application germinates only after the said fire mishap. According to the temple committee, they are bound to take some corrective measures to preserve the sanctity of the temple. Amid his exhaustive arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner, temple committee, in all fairness, submitted that, no money from the temple fund would be utilized for the purpose of proposed renovation work. Elaborating further, he added, some worshipers of the temple have expressed their willingness to make voluntary contribution for the purpose of said renovation work. If the renovation work is undertaken in such a manner, no harm would be caused to the interest of the temple and its worshipers."
6. Based on the above reasoning, the court below passed the following order:- ..5.. , In the result,
“(1). The Interlocutory Application is allowed. (2). Sanction is hereby granted to the petitioner/temple committee to undertake the renovation activity as proposed in the plan submitted along with the instant Interlocutory Application for clarity, the copy of the plan thus produced by the petitioner shall append
with this order
(3) No permission is granted to the petitioner/temple
committee to spent any amount from the temple fund for the proposed renovation work and the permitted renovation work shall be carried out with aid of the voluntary contribution made by the worshipers or through other suitable means that will not breach the sanctity of the temple. It shall be ensured that, the permitted work will not create any liability to the assets of the temple properties.
(4) Whatever be the duties assigned to the sub
committees formed by the petitioner and the present temple administration shall maintain proper accounts for the entire money that are to be spent for the renovation work and on completion of the proposed renovation work, an audited version of the same shall be submitted before this Court for verification.
(5) It is made clear that, if any financial irregularities are
found subsequently that attached with the permitted renovation work, under this orders, the members of the present managing committee of the temple and their assets alone will be jointly and severally liable for those financial irregulaities.
(6) The permitted renovation work shall be completed
within a period of 6 months from the date of this order
and if not completed on time, the petitioner/temple committee shall approach this court for the extension of time with proper explanation.
(7) Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no order as to costs.” ..6.. ,
7. The Court below has taken note of the fact that
the Temple Committee was required to take some corrective measures to preserve the sanctity of the temple and that some of the worshipers have expressed their willingness to make voluntary contributions for the purpose of renovation work.
8. While granting permission to the respondents
to proceed with renovation works, the Court below has made it clear that the present temple administration shall maintain proper accounts for the entire money that are to be spent for the renovation work and audited version of the same shall be submitted before the court for verification.
9. The power under Article 227 of the Constitution
would be restricted to interference in cases of grave dereliction of duty or flagrant violation of law and would be exercised most sparingly in cases where grave injustice would be done unless the High Court interferes. ..7.. , It cannot be used as an appellate or revisional power.
10. The supervisory jurisdiction is not available to
correct mere errors of fact or law unless the following requirements are satisfied-- (1) the error is manifest or apparent on the face of the proceeding such as when it is based on clear ignorance or utter disregard of the provisions of law; and (2) a grave injustice or gross failure of justice occasioned thereby. Viewed on the touchstone of the principles discussed above, the order impugned requires no interference under Article 227 of the Constitution.
11. On a careful analysis of the materials placed
before the Court, this Court finds no reason to interfere with Ext.P6 order exercising the jurisdiction under Article 227 of Constitution of India. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the petition challenging Ext.P6 order will not sustain.
12. The learned counsel for the petitioner
..8.. , submitted that the impugned Ext.P6 order might not stand in the way of the direction issued by the Court below in I.A.No.5/2021, Ext.P3. There is nothing on record to show that Ext.P6 will stand in the way of the directions contained in Ext.P3. The Original Petition stands disposed of as above. Sd/- K. BABU, JUDGE kkj ..9.. , APPENDIX OF OP(C) 165/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE IA NO.4/2021 IN OS NO.97/1099 ME OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE'S COURT KOLLAM DATED 02/02/2021. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTIONS IN IA NO.4/2021 IN OS NO.97/1099 ME OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE'S COURT KOLLAM IA Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN IA NO.5/2021 IN OS NO.97/1099 ME OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE'S COURT, KOLLAM DATED Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE IA 8/2021 IN OS NO.97/1099 ME OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE'S COURT KOLLAM DATED 30/10/2021. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION IN IA DISTRICT JUDGE'S COURT, KOLLAM DATED Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN IA NO.8/2021 IN OS NO.97/1099 ME OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE'S COURT, KOLLAM DATED