The Honourable Mr.Justice ... vs S.Unnikrishnan on 31 July, 2015

[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Kerala High Court

The Honourable Mr.Justice ... vs S.Unnikrishnan on 31 July, 2015

The question mooted is whether 'Tables and Chairs' can be provided in the Oottupura/Mess Hall of the Vaikom Mahadeva Temple for serving 'Prathal prasadam' [after offering the 'Prathal' to the Deity] or whether it has to be taken by the devotees irrespective of their age, physical condition or ailments by sitting on the floor, from the plantain leaves placed on the floor.

2. While considering the above main question, several incidental questions get popped up, which also require to be answered and they are:

7 Whether the serving of 'Prathal prasadam' at Oottupura/Mess Hall is part of any religious ritual, which requires clearance by the 'Thanthri' ?

D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 2 : 7 Is not the "Prathal" (offering to the Deity) different from 'Prathal prasadam' (served to the devotees) after offering Prathal to the Deity ?

7 Does Oottupura/Mess Hall form part of the Temple ? 7 Is the objection raised from some corners against putting of Tables/Chairs for serving 'prathal prasadam' at Oottupura sustainable, when the objectors including the 'Thanthri' categorically express no objection for serving 'Prathal prasadam' using Tables and Chairs in the 'Mess Hall' (eastern portion of the Oottupura) ?

7 Will there be any violation of the ritual/custom/practice/usage, if the devotees are permitted to take Prathal prasadam' using Tables and Chairs in the Oottupura ?

Before going to these questions, it is necessary to go through the sequence of events, leading to this petition.

3. Complaints were preferred by several devotees and others before the Ombudsman appointed by this Court as to the difficulties experienced by them in participating the 'Prathal prasadam' in the Oottupura, especially the aged and ailing and the immediate necessity D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 3 : to provide Tables and Chairs in the Oottupura for taking 'prathal prasadam'. The aforesaid complaints, along with some other complaints dealing with the misconducts of some of the Devaswom employees and such other aspects were considered by the Ombudsman, who conducted a personal visit to the Temple to ascertain the facts and figures. It was thereafter, that TDB report No. 118 of 2015 dated 31.07.2015 was submitted before this Court suggesting various remedial measures. Pursuant to the said report, DBP No. 118 of 2015 came to be registered by this Court 'suo motu' and notice was ordered to the complainants on 04.01.2015, also making some observations as to the necessity to favourably consider the suggestions for providing benches and desks of appropriate quality for consuming the 'Prathal prasadam' and to mitigate the difficulties in this regard.

4. On 11.11.2015, after considering the materials on record and also after ascertaining the version of the authorities of the Devaswom and the Advocate Commissioner appointed by this Court, the necessity to construct a 'panthal' on the northern side of the Temple with sufficient area, close to the 'Oottupura' to serve as resting place/waiting place for the devotees, saving them from the scorching D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 4 : Sun or torrential rains and also to be used for as an 'idathavalam' for Sabarimala pilgrims were highlighted, giving appropriate directions in this regard. On 02.03.2016, the views of the Thantries of Vaikom Mahadeva temple regarding the use of 'Tables and Chairs' for providing 'Prathal prasadam' was ordered to be taken; however, making it clear that the views of the Thanthries in that regard, may not exclusively be decisive on the issue and adding that predominant opinion on the basis of the materials on record was to grant permission for use of such furniture. It was also categorically stated that, if the Thanthries were of the considered opinion that such furniture should not be permitted, the opinion was ordered to be accompanied by reliable materials on the basis of which it was rendered.

5. In the meanwhile, four persons stated as devotees of the Temple filed I.A. No. 37 of 2016 seeking to implead themselves as additional respondents, which was allowed as per separate order passed on 02.03.2016. In the affidavit filed in support thereof, the said additional respondents virtually opposed the move to provide Tables and Chairs for taking 'Prathal prasadam' at 'Oottupura', stating that it will militate against the 'vasthu prescription' of the Temple and D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 5 : be violative of the age old custom, usage & tradition. On coming across the said proceedings, the 5th petitioner in the said I.A., by name K.V. Shaji, sent a communication directly to the Registrar General of this Court by registered post, which on receipt, has been placed on record. It is stated therein, that the petitioners in the I.A. had misrepresented the facts before him and obtained his signature in the affidavit, as if it were only to request to bring about some change in the procedure of election to the Advisory Committee. It is accordingly requested that he might be permitted to withdraw from the proceedings.

6. It was pointed out on behalf of the complainants, through their counsel, on 30.03.2016 before this Court that the role of the Thanthri stands specifically mentioned in Chapter IV Volume 2 of the Travancore Devaswom Manuel. This Court took note of Clause 15 of the said Chapter and also the Rules framed by the Travancore Devaswom Board under Section 9 of the Travancore Temple Entry [Removal of Disabilities] Act, 1950 containing restrictions in entry to the Sreekovil, Thidappally and such other portions of Temple. The submissions made were to the effect that it was not within the domain of the advisory powers of the Thanthri, to give any restrictive D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 6 : covenant in the user of Chairs, Tables, Benches... etc, in the mess hall/'Oottupura' when 'Prathal prasadam' is served to the general public, after it is brought from the restricted area [after completion of the Prathal/offering to Deity and such other rituals].

7. After making some specific observations with regard to the construction of a 'nadapanthal' on 23.11.2016, a separate order was passed by this Court on the same day, virtually permitting use of Chairs/Tables for serving 'Prathal prasadam' in the 'Oottupura'. It will be worthwhile to extract the said order for brevity, clarity and to avoid repetition, as given below:

"For quite some time now, the question of providing facilities for the pilgrims to participate in the prathal prasadaoottu in the oottupura of Vaikkom Mahadeva Temple had been gaining attention, particularly on the question as to whether the pilgrims could be provided with sitting facility either by way of benches or chairs, so that they can have the prathal prasadam placed on desks/tables. In spite of repeated queries, the learned Thanthri has not raised any objection. This is obviously because the said issue cannot be intricately connected with the ritualistic aspects or the practices of the temple concerned. We say this because prathal is part of the offerings and the offering is accompanied by providing prathal in the manyasthanam within the naalambalam. Thereafter, the D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 7 : remaining portion of the prathal which is intended to be served as prathal prasadam to the pilgrims/devotees is carried from inside the temple to the oottupura which is outside the naalambalam and it is distributed as prasadam to the pilgrims/devotees. There is no objection for the process being carried by permitting the devotees/pilgrims to utilise benches/chairs and desks/tables for the purpose of consuming the prathal prasadam. We are told that the first among the complainants, Sri. S. Unnikrishnan, is prepared to make arrangements to provide desks/tables and chairs/benches free of costs for such utilisation in the oottupura. We also record that since the oottupura is put to such user on a daily basis for the purpose of prathal prasadam distribution, which is a daily event, such movables which would be provided by the said Sri. Unnikrishnanan or other devotees, will be reckoned as part of the assets of the temples."

8. It is reported by the Devaswom that, on passing the order as above, the Devaswom has issued consequential proceedings as borne by Annexure R1-A [produced along with statement dated 19.06.2017] for giving effect to the said order. As per the said statement, the Devaswom Board has virtually supported the cause projected by the complainants, also pointing out that the 'Oottupura' is situated 20mts. away from 'Chuttambalam' and that serving of food using Tables and D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 8 : Chairs will in no way violate the rituals and that it will be more convenient to all devotees and will also help to maintain hygiene. Illustration is given with reference to the course pursued for 'Vallasadya' at Aranmula temple, 'Prasadamoottu' at the first floor of the Chuttamblam of Guruvayoor temple which is situated on a higher pedestal than the sanctum sanctorum etc. It is added that Vaikkathappan is generally known as 'Annadana Prabhu' and causing more and more inconvenience to the devotees will be against the 'Will' of Vaikathappan. The said statement virtually negates the contentions raised by the petitioners including the two Thanthries and the two devotees who sought to implead themselves as the additional respondents 8 to 11 by filing I.A. No. 3078 of 2016.

8. The petitioners in the I.A. No. 3078 of 2016 have sought to vacate the interim order dated 23.11.2016, permitting use of Tables and Chairs for serving 'Prathal prasadam' in the Oottupura by filing I.A. No. 3079 of 2016. According to them, Ext. R8(a) 'Ashtamangala Prasna Charthu' does not enable any such use of Tables or Chairs, but permits only the use of 'peedom' like structures for taking food, as revealed from Clause 28 therein. It is stated that the objection is based on the belief that the Deity is also taking food along with the D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 9 : devotees by sitting on the floor and that nobody can be sure when the Deity will come and take the food; by virtue of which nobody can sit on a higher pedestal using Tables or Chairs. It is pointed out that 'Oottupura' is part of the Temple and the contentions of the complainants to the contrary is not correct. It is however conceded in paragraph 6 [wrongly shown as paragraph 5] of the affidavit in support of the I.A. that in the 'Manyasthanam' [immediately on the eastern portion of the northern door of the 'Naalambalam'], the presence of the Deity is imagined and thereafter food is offered to Thanthri, Melsanthi and Keezhsanthi by placing banana leaves on the floor and it is thereafter, that the devotees are offered food [prathal prasadam] in banana leaves in the 'Oottupura'. Since the belief is that the 'Deity' is taking food along with the devotees by sitting on the floor, the practice cannot be altered by putting Chairs as opined by the Thanthri in Ext. R8(b). The affidavit further states that the observations that the Thanthris had never objected is not correct and that when query was put to the Thanthri only on 23.11.2016, it was objected. It is also stated that no letter dated 26.03.2016 [stated as issued in this regard] was received by the Thanthri, nor was ever sent to them. It is stated that the change proposed will hurt the religious D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 10 : feelings and hence the interim order passed by this Court on 23.11.2016 is sought to be vacated. Some additional documents have been sought to be put on record by the petitioners in I.A. No. 3078 & 3079 of 2016, by filing I.A. No. 571 of 2017, virtually to contend that 'peedom' mentioned in Ext. R8(a) cannot be equated to a Chair or Bench and that the 'ahitham' on putting chairs in Oottupura has already been expressed in the 'Deva Prasana Charthu'.

10. A copy of the 'Vyakhra Pureesa Mahatmyam' authored by Sree Samba Siva Sasthri has been produced as Ext. R8(e) in support of the contention that the Deity is believed to be taking food by sitting along with the devotees on the floor. The prayer in I.A. No. 3079 of 2016 has been opposed by the complainants by filing a counter affidavit dated 11.01.2017. It has been asserted in the said affidavit that the Thanthries have no role in this regard and that the 'Oottupura' is never part of the Temple. There is no custom of even lighting a lamp in the 'Oottupura' before serving the 'prathal prasadam' and that all religious rituals with regard to the 'Prathal' will be concluded at 'Manyasthanam' - within the 'Naalambalam'. After taking food at the 'Manyasthanam' [along with the Deity] by sitting on the floor, the Thantries will accept 'dakshina' from the devotee who is D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 11 : conducting Vazhipadu/prathal as part of the ritual and by this, the ritualistic aspect of the 'Prathal' will be over. It is thereafter, that the 'prasadam' is taken to 'Oottupura' and served to the devotees/general public. It is asserted that no religious ceremony is performed in 'Oottupura' and that the complainants also never want to make any alternation or even a slight change in the rituals performed in the Temple. It is pointed out that in 1962, the 'Oottupura' of the Temple was leased out to the Central Warehousing Corporation as a godown for storing food materials intended for public distribution till 1970. The 'Prathal prasadam' distribution to the devotees was started again only in the year 1997 by Annadhana Trust in the Oottupura; whereas the Devaswom started 'prathal prasada' distribution only in the year 1998. Reference is made to various other Temples in Kerala, where 'prasada oottu' is being performed in 'Oottupura' using Tables and Chairs. Referring to the various photographs produced, the complainants assert that the 'Mess Hall' is part and parcel of the 'Oottupura' and that 'Chairs' are used while conducting various programs and celebrations inside the Temple, even just in front of the 'Sreekovil' as borne by Annexure A5. The complainants further assert in paragraph 10 of the said affidavit that, while the 4th additional D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 12 : respondent has sought to object the using of Chairs and Tables in 'Oottupura', insisting that 'Prathal prasadam' has to be taken by sitting on the floor, he himself takes food/Prathal prasadam by sitting much above the floor on the broad/wide window sill, as evident from Annexure A3 photograph. These vital aspects have not been rebutted by anybody.

11. The Advocate Commissioner appointed by this Court has filed a report giving the facts and figures in crystal-clear terms, also furnishing a sketch of the lie and location of the Temple structures including the 'Oottupura'. According to the Advocate Commissioner appointed by this Court, who is also a devotee of lord Vaikathappa and a permanent resident of nearby area in Vaikom, points out that there is absolutely no basis for the objection raised by Thanthris or anybody else and that there is nothing wrong in serving 'Prathal prasadam' by using Tables and Chairs, as the ritual is only in connection with taking of food at 'Manyasthanam' within the 'Naalambalam' and never beyond. It is also stated that, despite the specific order passed by this Court, no materials have been placed before this Court to justify that placing of Tables and Chairs in the 'Oottupura' will be against the religious rituals and that the consent of the Thanthri is necessary. It D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 13 : is also pointed out that no materials have been produced on the basis of which the opinion to the contrary has been rendered by the Thanthries.

12. In the course of the proceedings, I.A. No. 2522 of 2017 came to be filed by the petitioners in I.A. No. 3078 of 2016 producing copies of some 'Thaaliyolas' as Ext. R8(f), to contend that the practice of taking food by the Deity along with the devotees in 'Brahmin attire' is reflected from the said Thaaliyola written allegedly about 800 years ago. The reliance sought to be placed on the 'Thaaliyola' is vehemently opposed by all others. It is however stated in paragraph 5 of the affidavit filed in support of the I.A. that 'Mess hall' is not a part of the 'Oottupura' [and hence chairs and tables can be used in the mess hall]. It is also stated that, at times when the quantity of the 'Prathal' is very less, on serving it at Manyasthanam, it will be over and hence the 'Oottupura' was not being used for serving the 'Prathal prasadm'. It appears that the language used in Ext. R8(f) is in Sanskrit, but written in Malayalam letters, which by itself is not readable. The petitioners in the I.A. have never produced any legible copy, nor have they provided any translation of the version and hence it cannot be relied on. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 14 : the 4th respondent in the said I.A. producing various documents as Annexures A4(1) to A4(9), wherein a reference has been made to the Temple architecture in 'Thanthra Samuchayam' [the reference made to paragraph 8, as if Thanthra Samuchayam was written by Vasthu Sasthra expert Kanippayyur Damodaran Namboothiri may be a mistake]. Similarly, reference is made to 'Thulasi garland' [Thulasi haram] written by Aswathi Thirunal Gowri Lakshmi Bhai, dealing with the study of Travancore Temples.

13. It is stated that the 'Oottupra' was constructed during the period of Sree Moolam Thirunal of Travancore [1885 - 1924]. The 'Thaaliyola' stated as written 800 years ago would not have contained anything with regard to the 'Oottupura' constructed much later. It is also pointed out that, anybody can enter into the 'Oottupura' directly from the northern PWD road and the eastern Devaswom road, without entering the Temple courtyard and that the northern side of the Oottupura [formerly known as Kulappura malika] is having direct access to the 'kshethrakulam' situated on the northern side. The necessity to provide 'Prathal prasadam' by using Chairs and Tables in 'Oottupura' is highlighted as an essential requirement. The specific instructions given by the Thanthris as per letter dated 12.04.2008 D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 15 : [produced as Annexure R4(1)] with reference to clauses 7, 10, 11, 12 and 13; to the effect that the presence of the Deity is felt at the time of providing 'Prathal' at 'Manyasthanam' and that only after completing the rituals at 'Manyasthanam', could the 'Prathal prasadam' be taken to be served to the devotees in the 'Oottupura'; are also pressed into service.

14. Pursuant to the orders passed by this Court, the parties have filed their notes of arguments as well. This Court has gone through the entire materials on record including the notes of arguments and heard both the sides in detail.

15. In fact, 'Thanthra Samuchayam' was written somewhere in the year 1427 or so, by one of the "18= poets" of Samuthiri Raja, by name Chennas Manakkal Narayananan Namboothirippad. In Thanthra Samuchayam, discussion is made only with reference to the temples and poojas of seven Deities namely Siva, Vishnu, Durga, Ganapathy, Subramanian, Sankaranarayanan and Sasthavu. It was later supplemented by the son and disciple of the author [namely Sankaran Namboothiripad] by authoring 'Sesha Samuchayam' [See Chapter II of the 'Kshethra Chaithanya Rahasyam' written by Sri. Madhavaji and published by the Kerala Kshetra Samrakshna Samithi]. D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 16 :

16. Unlike places of worship of other religions, which are mostly prayer halls, it is a different and distinct concept in so far as Hindu Temples are concerned, which is more equated to a human body. This is illustrated in Bhagavat Gita [Chapter 13 - Kshetra Kshetrajna Vibhaga Yogam] as follows :

"Idam sareeram Kaunteya Kshethram ityabhidheeyate Etadyo vethi tham prahuh:

kshethrajna iti tadvidah"

[Hey Arjuna (Kaunteya), this Body is called 'Kshetram', who realises this, is called 'Kshetrajna'] Further, in so far as human body is concerned, different 'chakras' are involved such as Mooladhara chakra, Swadhishtana chakra, Manipooraka chakra [naval], Anahata chakra [heart], Visuddi chakra [throat], Aajna chakra [between the eyebrows on the forehead] and Sahasraara chakra [head]. The installation/'prathishta' inside the 'praasada' [sreekovil] is also stated as somewhat similar, which involves the different levels/stages. When the energy lying in the Moolachakra is ignited and taken through different levels to Sahasrara D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 17 : chakra [where lies the seat of god], with the help of ritualistic prayers/manthras/thanthras, it is said that a person attains the blissfulness of divine stature, which normally may not be possible in the case of normal beings, but facilitated to some extent with the cosmic effect and ambiance in the Temple.

17. Going by the materials on record, there cannot be any doubt that the 'Prathal' is an offering [nivedyam] to the Deity. The preparation of 'Prathal' [rice and payasam] is made in the 'Valiya adukkala' situated in the north eastern corner of the 'Naalambalam'. After completion of Uchapooja, as per the rituals, a lamp lit from the light in the 'Sreekovil' is taken and placed at 'Manyasthanam' [immediately on the eastern portion of the door of the northern wall of the Naalambalam], a plantain leaf is placed there in front of the lamp and prathal items served there first. The Thanthries, Melsanthies and Keezhsanthies are supposed to sit there on the floor at Manystahanam who are also served prathal items in plantain leafves and they have to take it there, sitting on the floor. The belief is that the Deity is taking the prathal from the plantain leaf placed there along with others. On completion of taking food by Thanthries/Santhies, the ritual is over and they come out and collect 'dakshina' from the devotee, who D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 18 : performed the 'Prathal' vazhipadu. If there is no devotee to conduct prathal, dakshina will be offered by the Devaswom Officer and thereafter the rice and payasam prepared in the Valiya-adukkala in Naalambalam will be taken in trolley to the 'Oottupura' to be served to the devotees, along with the curries prepared at 'Cheriya adukkala' situated near the Oottupura.

18. Coming to the proceedings in the Oottupura, unlike the procedure at Manyasthanam in Naalambalam, there is no practice of lighting any lamp or placing any separate plantain leaf with the prathal items as an offering to the Deity. So also, no separate seat or place is provided to the Deity and the devotees are let to be seated in a line and 'Prathal prasada' items are served on plantain leaves placed on the floor. Earlier, the floor was of inferior quality which has now been replaced by marble. Immediately after the first round of serving, quite a lot of food particles may be left on the floor and cleaning will be a difficult problem. It will get aggravated during rainy season and the devotees may be finding it extremely difficult to take 'Prathal prasadam' by sitting on the floor, compromising with their physical condition and also the hygiene aspects. It is in the said back ground, that a request has come to permit the devotees to take 'Prathal D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 19 : prasadam' at 'Oottupura', making use of Chairs and Tables.

19. There is no dispute that 'Prathal' is an offering made by the devotee to the Deity. Once the Deity takes the 'Prathal' along with Thantries, Melsanthies and Keezhsanthies at 'Manysthanam' in Naalambalam, the rest of the articles are taken from the Valiya adukkala in Naalambalam to the Oottupura on the northern side, situated about 50 - 80 metres away. Despite the verbal assertion by Thanthries and additional respondents 8 to 11, nothing is brought out to show that the Oottupura is part of the Temple where some or other ritual is being performed. As per the concept of a Hindu Temple, it mainly consists of :

- the Idol,

- Sreekovil/Sanctum santorum/Praasaada

- Mukhamandapam

- Balikkallu

- Dhwajasthambham and

- Chuttambalam/Gopuram As a matter of fact, no ritual is stated as being performed at 'Oottupura' and not even a lamp is lit and placed to have the presence of the Deity, nor is there any separate banana leaf placed there, with D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 20 : the Prathal items intended to be served to the Deity. To put it more clear, the 'Prathal' stands already given to Deity, who has taken it on the floor at 'Manysthanam', sitting along with the Thanthries, Melsanthies and Keezhsanthies. After the offer and acceptance of the Prathal by Deity, the remaining items become 'Prathal prasadam' which are taken from 'Naalambalam' to the Oottupura to be distributed to the devotees. It is quite obvious that 'Prathal' is different from 'Prathal prasadam'; the former being the offering to the God while the latter being the Prasadam of Deity, given to the devotees, after accepting the offering by the Deity. This being the position, it cannot be said that the distribution of 'Prathal prasadam' in the Oottupura is part of the ritual and the contention to the contrary is thoroughly wrong and misconceived.

20. It has been conceded by the Thanthries in the affidavit filed in support of the I.A.s filed for impleading, for vacating the interim stay and to accept the additional documents, that they do not have any objection in serving 'Prathal prasadam' using Chairs and Tables in the Mess hall. The objection is only with regard to the course of action in respect of 'Oottupura'. As a matter of fact, the pleadings and proceedings including the photographs clearly show that the place D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 21 : which has been identified as 'Mess hall' is the eastern part of the 'Oottupura' itself. No distinction, physical or conceptual, is seen as offered to distinguish the 'Mess hall' from the 'Oottupura'; but for a partition wall. Mess hall is the English translation of 'Oottupara' and the activity going on there is exactly the same. When the Thanthries and other objectors have failed to show any ritual as taking place in Oottupura and the specific assertion that not even a lamp is lit or placed in the Oottupura in honour of the Deity, nor any separate banana leaf is placed with Prathal items served on the leaf for the Deity, it cannot be said that any ritual is taking place, knowingly or unknowingly, in Oottupura.

21. Equally important is to note that, there is no pith or substance in the contentions of the objectors in saying that the Deity is also taking food along with the devotees. The Thanthries and objectors do not have a case that the Deity is taking food from the same plantain leaves from which the devotees are taking food. Admittedly, no separate leaf is provided in the 'Oottupura', intended to the Deity, as it is already done at the 'Manyasthanam'. That apart, the Thanthries and objectors submit with reference to clause 28(a) of Ext. R8(a) 'Prasna charthu' that, what is provided as 'Daivahitham' is D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 22 : only the usage of 'peedom' like materials for taking food in the Oottupura and that they do not have any objection in this regard. The complainants, the Devaswom and the Advocate Commissioner appointed by this Court submit in uniform voice that no 'Daivahitham' was ascertained whether Chairs and Tables "should not be used" in the 'Oottupura'. Even otherwise, what is stated in Ext. R8 (a) [Clause 28] is that, 'peedoms' could be used for taking food in the Oottupura, which virtually shows that it is not obligatory to take 'Prathal prasadam' by sitting on the floor itself and that same can be taken by sitting on an elevated position as well. The factual position disclosed from the pleadings and photographs is that, even the objector/additional 4th respondent himself is taking 'Prathal prasadam' by sitting at much elevated level, placing the plantain leaf on the wide window sill and taking food accordingly. The specific assertion and the materials produced have not been rebutted by the additional 4th respondent, the Thanthries or any other objectors.

22. With reference to the meaning of the term 'peedom', as given in 'Sabda Tharavali' by the author late Sreekandeswaram G. Padmanabha Pillai, the learned counsel for the complainant submits that it only means a 'higher pedestal' supported by four legs used for D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 23 : sitting and that it could mean a Simhasanam/throne as well. The height of 'peedom' is not defined anywhere, as conceded by the objectors. But according to them, it has to be a small structure. What is discernible from Ext.R8(a) is only that, it was not compulsory to sit on the floor while taking 'Prathal prasadam' at Oottupura. It also says that Chairs and Tables can be used outside; but it does not say what the ritual is, or in what way violation is resulted, or that on taking 'prasadam' by sitting on 'peedom' i.e. on higher level, in what way does it differ from taking food by sitting on Chair and using a Table. No explanation is forthcoming from the part of the objectors, how the alleged ritual is kept intact, while permitting the devotees to take 'Prathal prasadam' by using Tables and Chairs in the 'Mess hall', which is part and parcel of same Oottupura guarded by same roof and common side walls.

23. With regard to the contents of Ext. R8(a) 'prasna charthu', it is to be noted that while ascertaining the 'Daivahitham', the lapses/defects in different fields were noted. It is with reference to the said defects, that the remedial measures have been prescribed. Nowhere has any mention been made, as to the distribution of 'Prathal prasadam', but for the conduct of the 'Prathal' i.e offering to the Deity. D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 24 : Specific reference is made to the lapse on the part of the 'Thanthri' in taking the 'bhojan' [food] at Manyasthanam. When the lapse on the part of Thanthri in taking the 'Prathal' at Manyasthanam [along with the Deity] is pointed out, no insinuation is made anywhere as to the lapse or mistake, if any, with regard to the distribution of 'Prathal' to the devotees at the 'Mess hall or Oottupura'. It is with reference to the above lapses including of the Thanthries in not taking 'Prathal' at manyasthanam, that the remedial measures 1 to 29 have been given in the 'prasna charthu'. After prescribing such remedial measures, some additional requirements are also stipulated to be complied with; one of which is 'Ashtabhandha kalasam' and to conduct the necessary 'prayaschitham'. Once the 'kalasam' is performed as above, the further course of action has been specified under different clauses as 1 to 32, where comes clause 28 dealing with the 'no objection' in providing 'peedom' for taking 'Prathal prasadam' at Oottupura. It is quite evident from the proceedings and the sequence of events that, what has been spoken to in Clause 28 of the Steps to be pursued after 'Kalasam' ["kalasantharam anuvarthikkenda vishayangal" - wrongly printed as kalasantharam 'avarthikkenda' vishayangal] is only whether it is obligatory to sit on the floor of the D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 25 : Oottupura to take 'Prathal prasadam', which has been answered in the 'negative', holding that 'peedom' like materials could be made use of. As it stands so, it can never be said that 'Daivahitham' stated as ascertained by way of Ext.R8(a) 'Ashtamangala prasna charthu' is that the 'Prathal prasadam' has to be taken by sitting on the floor itself. This is more so, since the belief/concept in relation to lord Vaikathappa is that the lord is 'Annadana Prabhu' who wants to feed all his devotees. If anybody, because of old age, physical incapacities or mental ailments or such other reasons finds it difficult to take 'Prathal prasadam' by sitting on the floor or is denied 'Prathal prasadam' compelling such persons to sit on the floor, to get it, it may go against the Will of the Deity and as such, it cannot be sustained or tolerated.

24. As mentioned already, all of the religious rituals in the Temple are to be under the instructions of the 'Thanthri' and there cannot be any substitute in this regard, as 'Thanthri' is supposed to be the father of the Deity. It will be worthwhile to make a peep into the way in which the Thanthri is filling energy into the Idol by chanting/performing the Manthras/Thanthras. The various Manthras using the specific syllables and accent are creating different D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 26 : resonants/vibrations to the requisite extent. As mentioned already, the Thanthri, who knows the 'moolamanthra', can be the ultimate word only in respect of the rituals to be performed in the Temple, who does not have/cannot have any power or authority to deal with the administrative matters. Since this Court has already found that 'Oottupura' is not part of the Temple and further since the 'Prathal prasadam' is different from 'Prathal' to be offered to the Deity and still further, since nothing is stated as pleaded or proved as to any ritual taking place at Oottupura [unlike at Manyasthanam], the version now put forth before this Court does not inspire confidence to hold that no Chairs or Tables can be used for serving 'Prathal prasadam' at 'Oottupura'.

25. The pleadings and materials brought on record clearly show that Oottupuras were constructed by different Rulers who ruled the country at different points of time and they were mostly attached to the Temple. The purpose of such construction was mainly to provide, food and shelter to the pedestrians/pilgrims/Brahmins. By the passage of time, it became public, especially when the role of the Ruler was taken over by the Government; in particular, by providing a separate body as Devaswom [statutory body] in this regard. In D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 27 : other words, it is not at all obligatory, as per the Temple architecture, to ensure that Oottupura is also there, as part of the Temple. There are hundreds of Temples in Travancore as well as in Cochin, where no Oottupuras are there. This does not mean that the Temple architecture or 'vasthu' in respect of such Temples where no 'Oottupura' is built, is defective in any manner. It is pointed out that several Oottupuras were constructed by the Rulers of Travancore and of Kochi. The book titled as 'Pathonphatham Noottandile Keralam' - authored by Sri. P. Bhasakaran Unni and published by the Kerala Sahitya Academi refers to 32 Oottupuras of Travancore; such as 1. Thovala, 2. Sucheendram, 3. Vadasserry, 4. Padmanabhapuram, 5. Thiruvettar, 6. Parassala, 7. Neyyattinkara, 8. Varkkala, 9. Kadinamkulam, 10. Kazhakkoottam, 11. Veralam, 12. Aashramam,

13. Krishnapuram, 14. Padanayarkulangara, 15. Aranmula, 16. Kottarakkara, 17. Aryangavu, 18. Chengotta, 19. Kumarakovil, 20. Harippad, 21. Thiruvalla, 22. Mavelikkara, 23. Ambalappuzha, 24. Mullackal, 25. Cherthala, 26. Vaikom, 27. Thiruvallur, 28. Alappuzha, 29. Ettumanoor, 30. Moovattupuzha, 31. Perumbavoor, and 32. Aluva. It is also revealed that the Oottupuras constructed by the Rulers were operated by engaging several persons and later, by D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 28 : virtue of the mounting expense, various Oottupuras came to be closed down. In the instant case, it is specifically pointed out that the Oottupura at Vaikom Mahadeva Temple was let out to the Warehousing Corporation, to be used as their godown till 1970. It was only in the year 1997, that a Trust came forward to restart the 'annadanam' and the Devaswom took a similar decision in the year 1999. This by itself shows that no ritual was being performed in the 'Oottupura' atleast from 1962 onwards, till 1999 and same is the position even thereafter. There is no violation in any manner, since the rituals in connection with 'Prathal prasadam' are being performed at 'Manysathanam' by the Thantries/Santhikars by sitting on the floor and the 'Prathal' is served on banana leaves, in the name of god. No ritual is actually intended or taking place at Oottupura, as part of the religious activities.

26. In the above circumstances, this Court holds that the objection raised by Thanthries and others concerned in making use of Chairs and Tables for serving 'Prathal Prasadam' to the devotees in the 'Oottupura' is not correct or sustainable. There is no religious ritual in this regard and there cannot be any violation as well. The interim order passed by this Court on 23.11.2016 permitting use of D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 29 : Tables and Chairs to serve 'Prathal prasadam' to the devotees/public in the Oottupura is made absolute. The respondent Devaswom is permitted to proceed with further steps accordingly.

27. However, this Court is all the more vigilant to see that no sentiments of any devotee is hurt, if he believes of any rituals and apprehends loss of chance to take 'Prathal prasadam' by sitting on the floor, under the firm belief that the Deity also may come there and will take food along with him, by sitting on the floor. In the said circumstances, the Devaswom is directed to identify an appropriate place having sufficient area, where 'Prathal prasadam' could be served to such devotees who want to take food by sitting on the floor of the Oottupura and the entire remaining area could be made use of for serving food to the others, providing Chairs and Tables. The above two areas can be separated by temporary screens, with sufficient gap in between, for facilitating easy thoroughfare. Proper sign boards shall be put on the walls and such other appropriate places to identify the place of choice of the devotee, to satisfy his/her wish and desire.

28. With the above observations and directions, we close this DBP. We make it clear that all the other directions given already by way of separate orders in respect of different instances including D.B.P. No. 118 of 2015 : 30 : construction of 'nadapanthal' will stand in tact and they have to be given effect to by all concerned, taking the proceedings to logical conclusion. All pending I.A.s stand closed.

sd/-

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE sd/-

SHIRCY V., JUDGE kmd /True copy/ P.A. To Judge

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Kerala High Court