Kerala High Court
Complainant/ vs By Adv
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: P.R.Ramachandra Menon, Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF APRIL 2018 / 23RD CHAITHRA, 1940
DBP.No. 45 of 2017
IN THE MATTER OF TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD -REPORT NO.45 OF 2017-
COMPLAINTS RECEIVED FROM THE DEVOTEES OF KOLLAM MUGHATHALA KANNANALLUR SREE
DHARMA SASTHA TEMPLE-ABOUT DEVASWOM LAND AND DEVASWOM WATCHER-SUO MOTU
PROCEEDINGS INITIATED - REGARDING.
-----
COMPLAINANT/PETITIONERS
-----------------------
SANTHAN,
SANTHI BHAVAN, KANNANALLUR, KOLLAM ON BEHALF OF THE
DEVOTEES MUGHATHALA KANNANALLUR SREE DHARMA SASTHA
TEMPLE.
BY ADV....
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER ,
TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. THE LAND SPECIAL OFFICER
TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
3. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR
L.C.UNIT, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
* ADDL.R4 & R5 IMPLEADED
4. THE THRIKKOVILVATTOM GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
5. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,KOLLAM .
* ADDL.R4 & R5 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER
DATED 29/8/2017 IN DPB 45/2017.)
R1 TO R3 BY ADVS. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, SC,
SRI.P.RAMACHANDRA
R5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. E.S.ASHRAF
ADV.SRI.P.RAMACHANDRAN AMICUS CURIAE FOR OMBUDSMAN.
THIS DEVASWOM BOARD PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13-04-2018,
ALONG WITH DBA.NO.04/2018 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
TS
18.04.2018
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON &
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JJ.
============================
DBP No.45 of 2017 & DBA No.4 of 2018
============================
Dated this the 13th day of April, 2018
ORDER
Devan Ramachandran, J.
Both the above proceedings are in relation to the properties belonging to the Kannanallur Sree Dharma Sastha Temple. The report of the learned Ombudsman for Travancore and Cochin Devaswom Boards, namely TDB Report No.45 of 2017, which is registered on the basis of a complaint filed by certain devotees, which has led to DBP No.45 of 2017 being registered before this Court, shows that the temple has 44.50 Ares of land comprised of in Sy.No.638/7.
2. We see from the various pleadings available on record that the land was, in fact, measured on the basis of a judgment of this Court in O.P.No.16944 of 1997, as per which, the District Collector, Kollam and the Revenue Officials had measured the land and found it to be of the afore-mentioned extent. We also notice that survey stones were installed by the Kollam Taluk Surveyor and the RDO and therefore, that there is no dispute as DBP No.45 of 2017 & DBA No.4 of 2018 2 to the boundaries of the property.
3. It transpires that, raising a dispute on the ownership of the property concerned, the Thrikkovilvattom Grama Panchayath had filed a suit numbered as O.S.No.236 of 2009 before the Sub Court, Kollam, which was, however, dismissed and that against which, an appeal numbered as R.F.A.No.290 of 2012 is pending before this Court.
4. While matters stand so, the Devaswom feels that the property remaining without the protection of a boundary wall would be deleterious to its interests and therefore, has filed D.B.A.No.4 of 2018 seeking permission to construct a compound wall around the property, subject to the final result of R.F.A.No.290 of 2012. We notice that in D.B.P.No.45 of 2017, the learned Ombudsman has also recorded this and has recommended that appropriate directions be given subject to the result of R.F.A.No.290 of 2012 to protect the property.
5. In view of the affirmative recommendations made by the learned Ombudsman and taking into account the submissions made on behalf of the Devaswom, we feel it apposite that suitable directions be given to ensure that the property is protected until such time as a final decision is taken by this DBP No.45 of 2017 & DBA No.4 of 2018 3 Court in R.F.A.No.290 of 2012.
6. When we made our mind clear as above at the Bar, the learned counsel appearing for the Thrikkovilvattom Grama Panchayath submits that the property in question is adjacent to a market run by the Panchayat and that the only access to the said market is through this property. This submission was, in fact, also made by the learned counsel on an earlier occasion, when we had considered this matter and we had then directed the learned counsel for the Panchayat to inform us whether there was an alternate access to the market except through the property of the temple. Today, when the matter is taken up, even though the learned counsel for the Grama Panchayat did not have a specific answer to our query, the learned standing counsel for the Devaswom Board submits vehemently that the market has a separate access and that no part of the property of the temple has been or is being used as an access by any of the members of the public to the market.
7. In view of the above, we grant permission, as prayed for in D.B.A.No.4 of 2018, to the Travancore Devaswom Board to construct an appropriate fencing/temporary wall around the property in question and we clarify that the said construction DBP No.45 of 2017 & DBA No.4 of 2018 4 will be subject to the final result of the judgment of this Court in R.F.A.No.290 of 2012. After construction is so made, it is needless to say that the Devaswom Board will have to submit the accounts before the Audit Department for mandatory audit.
8. That being said, we notice that in DBP No.45 of 2017, there is an additional issue regarding a Watcher and a Santhi, who had been engaged by the Devaswom Board to take care of this property. There are some allegations against them but we are told by the learned standing counsel that these issues are no longer relevant because both of them have been transferred and that such issues are not now required to be considered by this Court.
Recording the above submission, we close DBP No.45 of 2017 with the afore directions and DBA No.4 of 2018 is ordered with the afore permission to the Devaswom Board.
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
JUDGE
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
stu JUDGE