Divya Somanad vs Cochin Devaswom Board on 27 May, 2025

[Cites 20, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Divya Somanad vs Cochin Devaswom Board on 27 May, 2025

The petitioner, who is a resident at Kadavanthra (K.P.Vallon Road) in Ernakulam District and devotee of Chottanikkara Devi Temple, which is a temple under the management of the 1 st respondent Cochin Devaswom Board, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P2 draft list of members published on 15.05.2025 by the 1st respondent Cochin Devaswom Board, through the 3rd respondent Devaswom Manager, Chottanikkara Devaswom, from among the applicants for membership in the registered mandalam of the devotees, for being elected as members of the Temple Advisory Committee of Chottanikkara Devi Temple. The document marked as Ext.P1 is an application for membership dated 11.05.2025 made by the petitioner, after remitting a fee of Rs.25/-. The grievance of the petitioner is that her name is not included in Ext.P2 draft list published on 15.05.2025 on the ground that she is not residing within the traditional boundary of Chottanikkara Devi Temple, since as per the new bye-law (Rules) the membership is restricted to devotees 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 4 who are born and brought up in Chottanikkara. Against rejection of Ext.P1 application for membership, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 objection dated 16.05.2025 before the 2nd respondent Assistant Commissioner, Chottanikkara Devaswom. The document marked as Ext.P4 is the copy of the order dated 11.04.2025 of the Commissioner, Cochin Devaswom Board, whereby the modified bye-law (Rules) under sub-section (3) of Section 76A of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950, regarding the formation of the Temple Advisory Committees in the temples under the management of the 1st respondent Cochin Devaswom Board, which was published in Kerala Gazette dated 03.01.2025, was forwarded to all Devaswom Manager/Devaswom Officer/Junior Devaswom Officer, with a direction to initiate steps for constituting Temple Advisory Committees in such temples, with a further direction to the concerned Assistant Commissioner to issue necessary instructions to the officers concerned for constitution of such Temple Advisory Committees. A copy of the modified bye-law (Rules) is enclosed along with Ext.P4 order dated 11.04.2025. In this writ petition, the petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the 1st respondent Cochin 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 5 Devaswom Board to amend clause (3) of Ext.P4 bye-law (Rules).

2. On 23.05.2025, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Standing Counsel for Cochin Devaswom Board was directed to place on record the previous bye-law framed under sub-section (3) of Section 76A of the Act. Along with a memo dated 24.05.2025, the learned Standing Counsel has placed on record previous bye-law framed under sub-section (3) of Section 76A of the Act, which was in force till the issuance of the Kerala Gazette notification dated 03.01.2025.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned counsel for Cochin Devaswom Board for the respondents.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner, who is a resident of Kadavanthra (K.P.Vallon Road), which is not within the traditional boundaries of Chottanikkara Devi Temple, is legally entitled for membership in the registered mandalam of the devotees for being elected as a member of the Temple Advisory Committee of that temple. The stand to the contra, taken by the 1st respondent Cochin Devaswom Board, is arbitrary and illegal. Moreover, the provisions contained 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 6 in clause (3) of the modified bye-law (Rules) framed under sub- section (3) of Section 76A of the Act, require amendment, in order to include even devotees who are not born within the traditional boundaries of the temple and residing outside such boundaries. Further, the provisions in clause (3) of the modified bye-law require modification in order to ensure that there is proper representation of one woman and one member belonging to scheduled caste/scheduled tribe community in the Temple Advisory Committees of the temples under the management of the 1st respondent Cochin Devaswom Board.

5. Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel for Cochin Devaswom Board would submit that the eligibility criteria regarding membership in a Temple Advisory Committee, with reference to the traditional boundaries of the temple has not undergone any change or modifications by the order of this Court dated 18.03.2024 in DBP No.5 of 2021. Further, the provisions in the modified bye-law as contained in clause (3) do not require any further modification, in order to ensure that one woman and one member belonging to scheduled caste/scheduled tribe is included in the Temple Advisory Committee.

2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 7

6. The Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950, was made for making provisions for the administration, supervision and control of incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms and of other Hindu Religious Endowments and Funds. Chapter VIII of the Act deals with Cochin Devaswom Board. Section 62 of the Act deals with vesting of administration in the Board. As per sub-section (1) of Section 62, the administration of incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms and Hindu Religious Institutions which were under the management of the Ruler of Cochin immediately prior to the first day of July, 1949 either under Section 50G of the Government of Cochin Act, XX of 1113, or under the provisions of the Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1 of 1081, and all their properties and funds and of the estates and all institutions under the management of the Devaswom Department of Cochin, shall vest in the Cochin Devaswom Board. As per sub-section (2) of Section 62, notwithstanding the provisions contained in sub-section (1), the regulation and control of all rituals and ceremonies in the temple of Sree Poornathrayeesa at Trippunittura and in the Pazhayannur 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 8 Bhagavathy temple at Pazhayannur shall continue to be exercised as hitherto by the Ruler of Cochin.

7. Section 62A of the Act, inserted by Act 14 of 1990, deals with Devaswom properties. As per Section 62A, all immovable properties vested in the Cochin Devaswom Board under sub-section (1) of Section 62 shall be dealt with as Devaswom Properties. The provisions of the Kerala Land Conservancy Act, 1957 shall be applicable to Devaswom lands as in the case of Government lands. As per Section 62B, all unassigned lands belonging to the Devaswom under the sole management of the Board shall be deemed to be the property of the Government for the purpose of the Kerala Land Conservancy Act, 1957 and all the provisions of that Act shall, so far as they are applicable, apply to such lands.

8. Section 68 of the Act provides for administration by the Board as a trustee. As per sub-section (1) of Section 68, subject to the provisions of the Act and of any other law for the time being in force, the Board shall be bound to administer the affairs of incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms and institutions under its management in accordance with the objects of the 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 9 trust, the established usage and customs of the institutions and to apply their funds and property for such purposes. As per sub- section (2) of Section 68, notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), the Board may, out of the funds under their control, set apart such sum as they deem fit for the educational uplift, cultural advancement and economic betterment of the Hindu community, after providing adequately for the purposes of the institutions which have to be met from the said fund.

9. Section 73A of the Act deals with duties of the Board. As per Section 73A, it shall be the duty of the Board to perform the functions enumerated in clauses (i) to (iv), namely, (i) to see that the regular traditional rites according to the practice prevalent in the religious institution are performed promptly; (ii) to monitor whether the administrative staff and employees and also the employees connected with religious rites are functioning properly; (iii) to ensure proper maintenance and upliftment of the Hindu Religious Institutions; (iv) to establish and maintain proper facilities in major temples for the devotees.

10. Section 74 of the Act deals with vesting of jurisdiction in the Board. As per Section 74, subject to the provisions of sub-

2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 10 section (2) of Section 62, all rights, authority and jurisdiction belonging to or exercised by the Ruler of Cochin prior to the 1st day of July, 1949 in respect of incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms and Institutions shall vest in and be exercised by the Board in accordance with the provisions of the Act. Section 74 of the Act deals with superintendence and control by the Board. As per Section 64, the Board shall, subject to the provisions of Part II of the Act, exercise supervision and control over the acts and proceedings of all officers and servants of the Board and of the Devaswom Department.

11. Section 76A of the Act deals with formation of Temple Advisory Committees in the temples under the Cochin Devaswom Board. As per sub-section (1) of Section 76A, a committee for each temple in the name "Temple Advisory Committee'' (name of the Temple)" may be constituted in order to ensure participation of Hindu devotees. As per sub-section (2), the Temple Advisory Committee constituted under sub-section (1) may be approved by the Board. As per sub-section (3), the composition of an Advisory Committee under sub-section (1) shall be such as may be prescribed by rules made by the Board, not inconsistent with any 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 11 practice, prevailing, if any.

12. Pursuant to the orders of this Court dated 09.11.2011 and 13.11.2011 in DBP Nos.78 of 2011, the draft bye-law for the constitution of Temple Advisory Committees in the temples under the management of the Cochin Devaswom Board was prepared by the Board. The draft bye-law was finalised after considering the objections in the meetings convened by the learned Ombudsman on 30.06.2012 and 03.07.2012. In Report No.123 of 2012 submitted by the learned Ombudsman, certain suggestions were made with regard to modification of some of the clauses. Various parties have filed affidavits in DBP No.78 of 2011 incorporating their suggestions in the matter. Thereafter, the Division Bench finalised the bye-law with the modifications suggested in the order dated 22.07.2013 in DBP No.78 of 2011 and the Board was directed to file an action taken report producing therewith the bye- law as modified in terms of the directions contained in that order.

13. The bye-law approved by the order of this Court dated 22.07.2013 in DBP Nos.8 of 2010 and 78 of 2011 was published in Kerala Gazette, in terms of Section 123 of the Act. Review petitions were filed seeking review of the order of this Court dated 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 12 22.07.2013. By the order dated 11.08.2015, those review petitions were disposed of approving the amendments insofar as Clause 25 of the bye-law is concerned. Thereafter, circular dated 16.06.2019 and circular dated 24.01.2019 were issued by the Cochin Devaswom Board with regard to the functioning of the Temple Advisory Committees. In terms of the directions issued by this Court in the order in DBP No.31 of 2020, the Board made certain suggestions regarding the amendment of the bye-law for the formation of the Temple Advisory Committees.

14. As already noticed, as per sub-section (1) of Section 68 of the Act, subject to the provisions of the Act and of any other law for the time being in force, the Cochin Devaswom Board shall be bound to administer the affairs of incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms and institutions under its management in accordance with the objects of the trust, the established usage and customs of the institutions and to apply their funds and property for such purposes.

15. In Ram Mohan Das v. Travancore Devaswom Board and others [1975 KLT 55], in the context of Section 31 of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, which 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 13 deals with the management of Devaswoms by Travancore Devaswom Board, a provision which is pari materia Section 68 of the said Act, a learned Single Judge of this Court held that under Section 31 of the Act, the Travancore Devaswom Board shall manage the properties and affairs of the Devaswoms, both incorporated and unincorporated and arrange for the conduct of the daily worship and ceremonies and of the festivals in every temple according to its usage. The position of the Board in regard to the Devaswoms - incorporated and unincorporated - is analogous to that of trustees. Any improper act of the Trustees could be questioned by a worshipper. The law laid down in the said decision applies with equal force in matters relating to the administration of incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms by the Cochin Devaswom Board.

16. In M.V. Ramasubbiar v. Manicka Narasimachara [(1979) 2 SCC 65], in the context of Sections 49, 51 and 52 of the Trusts Act, 1882, the Apex Court explained the nature of the fiduciary position of the trustee and his duties and obligations. It is the duty of the trustees of the property to be faithful to the Trust and execute any document with reasonable diligence in the 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 14 manner of an ordinary prudent man of business would conduct his own affairs. A trustee could not, therefore, occasion any loss to the Trust and it is his duty to sell the property, if at all that was necessary, to best advantage. Paragraph 4 of that decision reads thus;

"4. There is some controversy on the question whether Defendant 1 made an outright purchase of the suit property for and on behalf of the trust for Rs 21,500 on April 19, 1959, or whether he intended to purchase it for himself and then decided to pass it on to the trust, for defendants have led their evidence to show that the property was allowed to be sold for Rs 21,500, which was less than its market value, as it was meant for use by the trust and that Defendant 1 was not acting honestly when he palmed off the property to his son soon after by the aforesaid sale deed Ext.B13 dated July 14, 1960. The fact, however, remains that Defendant 1 was the trustee of the property, and it was his duty to be faithful to the trust and to execute it with reasonable diligence in the manner an ordinary prudent man of business would conduct his own affairs. He could not therefore occasion any loss to the trust and it was his duty to sell the property, if at all that was necessary, to best advantage. It has in fact been well recognised as an inflexible rule that a person in a fiduciary position like a trustee is not entitled to make a profit for himself or a member of his family. It can also not be gainsaid that he is 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 15 not allowed to put himself in any such position in which a conflict may arise between his duty and personal interest, and so the control of the trustee's discretionary power prescribed by Section 49 of the Act and the prohibition contained in Section 51 that the trustee may not use or deal with the trust property for his own profit or for any other purpose unconnected with the trust, and the equally important prohibition in Section 52 that the trustee may not, directly or indirectly, buy the trust property on his own account or as an agent for a third person, cast a heavy responsibility upon him in the matter of discharge of his duties as the trustee. It does not require much argument to proceed to the inevitable further conclusion that the Rule prescribed by the aforesaid sections of the Act cannot be evaded by making a sale in the name of the trustee's partner or son, for that would, in fact and substance, indirectly benefit the trustee. Where therefore a trustee makes the sale of a property belonging to the trust, without any compelling reason, in favour of his son, without obtaining the permission of the court concerned, it is the duty of the court, in which the sale is challenged, to examine whether the trustee has acted reasonably and in good faith or whether he has committed a breach of the trust by benefitting himself from the transaction in an indirect manner. The sale in question has therefore to be viewed with suspicion and the High Court committed an error of law in ignoring this important aspect of the law although it had a direct bearing on the controversy before it."

(underline supplied) 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 16

17. In A.A. Gopalakrishnan v. Cochin Devaswom Board [(2007) 7 SCC 482] a Three-Judge Bench of the Apex Court held that the properties of deities, temples and Devaswom Boards are required to be protected and safeguarded by their trustees/archakas/shebaits/employees. Instances are many where persons entrusted with the duty of managing and safeguarding the properties of temples, deities and Devaswom Boards have usurped and misappropriated such properties by setting up false claims of ownership or tenancy or adverse possession. This is possible only with the passive or active collusion of the authorities concerned. Such acts of 'fence eating the crops' should be dealt with sternly. The Government, members or trustees of boards/trusts, and devotees should be vigilant to prevent any such usurpation or encroachment. It is also the duty of courts to protect and safeguard the properties of religious and charitable institutions from wrongful claims or misappropriation.

18. In Travancore Devaswom Board v. Mohanan Nair [(2013 (3) KLT 132] a Division Bench of this Court noticed that in A.A. Gopalakrishnan [(2007) 7 SCC 482] the Apex Court emphasised that it is the duty of the courts to protect and 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 17 safeguard the interest and properties of the religious and charitable institutions. The relevant principles under the Hindu law will show that the Deity is always treated similar to that of a minor and there are some points of similarity between a minor and a Hindu idol. The High Court therefore is the guardian of the Deity and apart from the jurisdiction under Section 103 of the Land Reforms Act, 1957 viz. the powers of revision, the High Court is having inherent jurisdiction and the doctrine of parens patriae will also apply in exercising the jurisdiction. Therefore, when a complaint has been raised by the Temple Advisory Committee, which was formed by the devotees of the Temple, about the loss of properties of the Temple itself, the truth of the same can be gone into by the High Court in these proceedings.

19. In Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and others [2022 (2) KHC 411], in the context of Sabarimala Devaswom, which is an incorporated Devaswom mentioned in Schedule I of the Act, under Chengannur Group, this Court held that, in view of the provisions under the Act and also the law laid down in the decisions referred to supra, the Travancore Devaswom Board is duty bound to ensure proper administration, supervision and 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 18 control of Sabarimala Devaswom,. The Board has a statutory duty to monitor whether its administrative officials and employees and also the employees connected with religious rites are functioning properly. The Board is duty bound to exercise proper supervision and control over the acts and proceedings of all officers and servants and to manage the properties and affairs of Sabarimala Devaswom and conduct daily worships and ceremonies and also festivals in the temple according to its usage. Position of the Board in this regard is analogous to that of trustees, as held by this Court in Ram Mohan Das [1975 KLT 55]. Any improper act of the trustees could be questioned by a worshiper. The Board and those entrusted with the duty of managing the properties and affairs of Sabarimala Devaswom are duty bound to protect the properties of the deity from any wrongful claims, theft or misappropriation. Any such wrongful claims, theft or misappropriation with the passive or active collusion of the authorities concerned, which are acts of 'fence eating the crops' should be dealt with sternly. Since the deity being a perpetual minor, this Court is having inherent jurisdiction to protect and safeguard the interest and properties of 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 19 the deity and the doctrine of parens patriae will also apply in the exercise of such jurisdiction.

20. DBP No.5 of 2021 was registered suo motu as per the directions contained in the order of a Division Bench of this Court dated 03.02.2021 in W.P.(C)No.6887 of 2020 since, while sitting in the jurisdiction to deal with Devaswom matters, that Division Bench has come across numerous writ petitions carrying allegations of malfunctioning, embezzlement, temporary misappropriation, etc. against the Temple Advisory Committees constituted under the Travancore Devaswom Board and Cochin Devaswom Board. In the order dated 02.02.2021 in DBP No.5 of 2021, the Division Bench noticed the provisions under the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950, which deals with the constitution of Temple Advisory Committees in the temples under the management of Travancore Devaswom Board and Cochin Devaswom Board. Section 31A of the Act deals with constitution of Temple Advisory Committees in the temples under the management of the Travancore Devaswom Board. Section 76A of the Act deals with constitution of Temple Advisory Committees in the temples under the management of Cochin Devaswom 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 20 Board. In the case of temples, which are controlled institutions under the Malabar Devaswom Board, Section 14 of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act was substituted by Act 31 of 2008, for the purpose of constituting Temple Advisory Committees in the temples over which the Malabar Devaswom Board is having supervisory control. The Division Bench noticed that the Travancore Devaswom Board and Cochin Devaswom Board have made Bye-law (Rules) to streamline the functioning of the Temple Advisory Committees. Though the Malabar Devaswom Board issued guidelines to streamline the functioning of the Temple Advisory Committees in temples over which the Board has supervisory control, those guidelines were set aside by a Division Bench of this Court. In the temples under the management of Travancore Devaswom Board and Cochin Devaswom Board, there is a provision for constituting Temple Advisory Committees for the purpose of ensuring participation of Hindu devotees in the affairs of the temples. The Division Bench noticed many instances where allegations of keeping huge amounts collected by the Temple Advisory Committees in the private accounts of the office bearers were raised. In some of such instances, the amount involved was 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 21 in lakhs. Due to lack of periodical auditing and lack of control over their functioning and the lack of proper guidelines in the matter of their functioning, there is absolutely no uniformity among the Temple Advisory Committee constituted with the devotees. Taking advantage of such situations, unpleasant situations as stated above occur time and again. The Division Bench noticed lacuna/laches on the part of the Travancore Devaswom Board and Cochin Devaswom Board in the matter of controlling the affairs of the Temple Advisory Committees. Considering the flooding of cases of such nature, the Division Bench thought it appropriate to streamline the functioning of the Temple Advisory Committees in exercise of the parens patriae jurisdiction and directed Registry to register a suo motu case as DBP and issue notice to the respective Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board, Cochin Devaswom Board and Malabar Devaswom Board and also the learned Amicus Curiae for the learned Ombudsman for Travancore and Cochin Devaswom Boards.

21. DBP No.5 of 2021 was disposed of by the order dated 18.03.2024 - Suo Motu v. Travancore Devaswom Board and others [2024:KER:53279] - finalising the modifications to the 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 22 bye-law (Rules) framed under sub-section (3) of Section 76A of the Act, for the formation of the Temple Advisory Committees in the temples under the management of Cochin Devaswom Board as contained in paragraph 25 of that order. The Cochin Devaswom Board was directed to file a DBA before this Court along with the modified bye-law (Rules) and thereafter proceed with publishing the same in the Kerala Gazette, as provided under Section 123 of the Act. Pursuant to the direction contained in that order the Cochin Devaswom Board filed DBA No.12 of 2024. That DBA was disposed of by the order dated 11.11.2024 - Cochin Devaswom Board v. The Deputy Director, Kerala State Audit Department, Cochin Devaswom Board Audit [2024:

KER:83828].

22. In Suo Motu v. Travancore Devaswom Board and others [2024:KER:53279] the Division Bench held that the law laid down in the aforesaid decisions applies with equal force in matters relating to the administration of incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms by the Cochin Devaswom Board. The Position of the Board in this regard is analogous to that of trustees, as held by this Court in Ram Mohan Das [1975 KLT 55]. Any 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 23 improper act of the trustees could be questioned by a worshiper.

The Cochin Devaswom Board and those entrusted with the duty of managing the properties and affairs of incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms under its management are duty bound to protect the properties of the deity from any wrongful claims, theft or misappropriation. Any such wrongful claims, theft or misappropriation with the passive or active collusion of the authorities concerned, which are acts of 'fence eating the crops' should be dealt with sternly. Since the deity being a perpetual minor, this Court is having inherent jurisdiction to protect and safeguard the interest and properties of the deity and the doctrine of parens patriae will also apply in the exercise of such jurisdiction.

23. As held by this Court in Major Vellayani Devi Temple Advisory Committee v. State of Kerala [2023 (2) KHC 290] and reiterated in Rajalekshmi P. v. State of Kerala [2023 (3) KHC 491], the role of a Temple Advisory Committee constituted under Section 31A of the Act, the activities of which are regulated by the bye-laws framed under sub-section (3) of Section 31A of the Act, in a temple under the management of the Travancore Devaswom Board is to assist the Board and its officials to 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 24 discharge its functions under the provisions of Section 15A of the Act.

24. The provisions under Section 76A of the Act which deals with the formation of the Temple Advisory Committees in temples under the management of the Cochin Devaswom Board is pari materia to the provisions under Section 31A of the Act, which deals with the formation of Temple Advisory Committees in temples under the management of the Travancore Devaswom Board. The only distinction regarding membership in the registered mandalam of the devotees is that while clause (3) of the bye-law (Rules) framed under sub-section (3) of Section 31A of the Act restricts membership in the registered mandalam for the devotees who are residing within a distance of 5 kms from the temple, clause (3) of the bye-law (Rules) framed under sub- section (3) of Section 76A of the Act restricts membership in the registered mandalam for the devotees born and brought up and residing within the traditional boundaries of the temple. Therefore, the law laid down by this Court in Major Vellayani Devi Temple Advisory Committee [2023 (2) KHC 290] and Rajalekshmi P. [2023 (3) KHC 491] are squarely applicable in the matter of 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 25 Temple Advisory Committees in the temples under the management of the Cochin Devaswom Board.

25. Clause (3) of the bye-law (Rules) framed under sub- section (3) of Section 76A of the Act prior to the modification made by the order of this Court dated 18.03.2024 in DBP No.5 of 2021 and that after such modification, read thus;

                        Before                                                            After

3. അംഗത്വം                                                      3. അംഗത്വം
            ഉറച്ച ഈശ്വരവിശ്വാസികളം ക്ഷേത്ര                                  ഉറച്ച ഈശ്വരവിശ്വാസികളം ക്ഷേത്ര
കാരയങ്ങളില്‍         ത്ാല്‍പരയവം         ക്ഷേത്രത്തിന്റെ        കാരയങ്ങളില്‍         ത്ാല്‍പരയവം        ക്ഷേത്രത്തിന്റെ
ഉമനത്തിനുക്ഷവണ്ടി            നിസവാര്‍ത്ഥ         ക്ഷസവനം        കേനംേിന                                  കാരയങ്ങള്‍ക്ക്കം
നടത്തുവാന്‍ സന്നദ്ധനാന്റെന്ന്                   ക്ഷേവസവം        ഉന്നമനത്തിനുക്ഷവണ്ടി              മുഴുവന്‍          സമയ
അധികാരികള്‍ക്ക്                     ക്ഷ ാധയമുളളവരം              നിസവാര്‍ത്ഥ ക്ഷസവനം നടത്തുവാന്‍ കഴിയുന്ന
പ്രായപൂര്‍ത്ത്തിയായവരമായ                        ഏന്റത്ാര        പ്രായപൂര്‍ത്ത്തിയായവരമായ                        ഏന്റത്ാര
ഹിന്ദുവിനും ക്ഷേത്ര ഉപക്ഷേശ്ക സമിത്ിയില്‍                       ഹിന്ദുവിനുംക്ഷേത്ര ഉപക്ഷേശ്ക സമിത്ിയില്‍
അംഗത്വത്തിന്              അര്‍ത്ഹത് ഉണ്ടായിരിക്കം.              അംഗത്വത്തിന്            അര്‍ത്ഹത്       ഉണ്ടായിരിക്കം.
ക്ഷേത്ര           ഉപക്ഷേശ്ക                  സമിത്ിയില്‍        ക്ഷേത്ര             ഉപക്ഷേശ്ക                സമിത്ിയില്‍
അംഗമാകുന്നവര്‍ത്                          ക്ഷേത്രവമായി          അംഗമാകുന്നവര്‍ത്                         ക്ഷേത്രവമായി
    ന്ധന്റെട്ടവരം                        ക്ഷേത്രത്തിന്റെ            ന്ധന്റെട്ടവരം                       ക്ഷേത്രത്തിന്റെ
ആചാരപരമായ                              ഭൂപ്രക്ഷേശ്ങ്ങളില്‍      ആചാരപരമായ                             ഭൂപ്രക്ഷേശ്ങ്ങളില്‍
ഉള്‍ക്ന്റെടുന്നവരം പത്ിവായി ക്ഷേത്രത്തില്‍                      ഉള്‍ക്ന്റെടുന്നവരം പത്ിവായി ക്ഷേത്രത്തില്‍
വരന്നവരം ക്ഷേത്ര പുക്ഷരാഗത്ിക്ക ക്ഷവണ്ടി                        വരന്നവരം ക്ഷേത്ര പുക്ഷരാഗത്ിക്ക ക്ഷവണ്ടി
പ്രവര്‍ത്ത്തിക്കന്നവരം ക്ഷേത്രത്തിന്റെ ചുറ്റുവട്ടത്ത്           പ്രവര്‍ത്ത്തിക്കന്നവരം ക്ഷേത്രത്തിന്റെ ചുറ്റുവട്ടത്ത്
ജനിച്ചു               വളര്‍ത്ന്ന്            ഔക്ഷേയാഗിക         ജനിച്ചു               വളര്‍ത്ന്ന്             ഔക്ഷേയാഗിക
ആവശ്യങ്ങള്‍ക്കായി ദൂന്റര ത്ാമസിക്കന്നവരമായ                      ആവശ്യങ്ങള്‍ക്കായി ദൂന്റരത്ാമസിക്കന്നവരമായ
ഹിന്ദുകളായി ജനിച്ച എല്ലാവര്‍ത്ക്കം ക്ഷേത്ര                      ഹിന്ദുകളായി ജനിച്ച എല്ലാവര്‍ത്ക്കം ക്ഷേത്ര
ഉപക്ഷേശ്ക         സമിത്ിയില്‍           അംഗങ്ങളാകാം.            ഉപക്ഷേശ്ക         സമിത്ിയില്‍          അംഗങ്ങളാകാം.
എന്നാല്‍             ബുദ്ധിസ്ഥിരത്യില്ലാത്തവര്‍ത്ക്കം,          എന്നാല്‍             ബുദ്ധിസ്ഥിരത്യില്ലാത്തവര്‍ത്ക്കം,
സവഭാവദൂഷ്യത്താക്ഷ ാ                   ദുരാചാരത്താക്ഷ ാ          സവഭാവദൂഷ്യത്താക്ഷ ാ                   ദുരാചാരത്താക്ഷ ാ
ക്രിമിനല്‍ ക്ഷകസുകളില്‍ ശ്ിേികന്റെട്ടവര്‍ത്ക്കം,                ക്രിമിനല്‍ ക്ഷകസുകളില്‍ ശ്ിേികന്റെട്ടവര്‍ത്ക്കം,
സാമ്പത്തിക ക്രമക്ഷകടുകളില്‍ ഉള്‍ക്ന്റെട്ടവര്‍ത്ക്കം,            സാമ്പത്തിക ക്രമക്ഷകടുകളില്‍ ഉള്‍ക്ന്റെട്ടവര്‍ത്ക്കം,
മുമ്പ്       ക്ഷേക്ഷത്രാപക്ഷേശ്ക           സമിത്ികളില്‍         മുമ്പ്       ക്ഷേക്ഷത്രാപക്ഷേശ്ക          സമിത്ികളില്‍
പ്രവര്‍ത്ത്തിച്ച്                   നിയമരഹിത്മായ                പ്രവര്‍ത്ത്തിച്ച്                    നിയമരഹിത്മായ
പ്രവര്‍ത്ത്തനങ്ങളില്‍                ഏര്‍ത്ന്റെട്ടവര്‍ത്ക്കം,   പ്രവര്‍ത്ത്തനങ്ങളില്‍                 ഏര്‍ത്ന്റെട്ടവര്‍ത്ക്കം,
ക്ഷേത്രസവത്ത്             കകക്ഷേറി              കകവശ്ം          ക്ഷേത്രസവത്ത്             കകക്ഷേറി              കകവശ്ം
ന്റവച്ചിരിക്കന്നവര്‍ത്ക്കം               അംഗത്വത്തിന്           ന്റവച്ചിരിക്കന്നവര്‍ത്ക്കം              അംഗത്വത്തിന്
                                                                                                               2025:KER:36460
W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025                                                 26

അര്‍ത്ഹത്യുണ്ടായിരിക്കന്നത്ല്ല.                           ക്ഷേത്ര       അര്‍ത്ഹത്യുായിരിക്കന്നത്ല്ല. ക്ഷേത്ര ഉപക്ഷേശ്ക
ഉപക്ഷേശ്ക സമിത്ി ത്ിരന്റെടുക്കന്നത്ിന് ഒര                               സമിത്ി ത്ിരന്റെടുക്കന്നത്ിന് ഒര ജനറല്‍
ജനറല്‍              ക്ഷ ാഡി          രൂപീകരിക്ഷകണ്ടത്ാെ്.               ക്ഷ ാഡി രൂപീകരിക്ഷകണ്ടത്ാെ്. ആയത്ിന്
ആയത്ിന് ന്റകാച്ചിന്‍ ക്ഷേവസവം ക്ഷ ാര്‍ത്ഡ് ഒര                           ന്റകാച്ചിന്‍ ക്ഷേവസവം ക്ഷ ാര്‍ത്ഡ് ഒര അക്ഷപേ
അക്ഷപേ ക്ഷ ാം വിത്രെം ന്റചയ്യുന്നതം, ക്ഷേത്ര                            ക്ഷ ാം        വിത്രെം              ന്റചയ്യുന്നതം,             ക്ഷേത്ര
ഉപക്ഷേശ്ക                  സമിത്ിയില്‍             അംഗമാകാന്‍           ഉപക്ഷേശ്ക             സമിത്ിയില്‍                  അംഗമാകാന്‍
ആഗ്രഹിക്കവര്‍ത്                  ടി     ക്ഷ ാറം        പൂരിെിച്ച്       ആഗ്രഹിക്കന്നവര്‍ത്              ടി       ക്ഷ ാറം          പൂരിെിച്ച്
നല്‍ക്ഷകണ്ടതമാെ്.                    അപ്രകാരം            ഭിക്കന്ന       നല്‍ക്ഷകണ്ടതമാെ്. ടി ക്ഷ ാറത്തില്‍ ക്ഷേത്ര
അക്ഷപേകരന്റട വിവരം പരിക്ഷശ്ാധിച്ച് കരട്                                 ഉപക്ഷേശ്ക             സമിത്ിയില്‍                  അംഗമാകാന്‍
    ിസ്റ്റ് ക്ഷേത്രത്തിന്റെ ക്ഷനാട്ടീസ് ക്ഷ ാര്‍ത്ഡില്‍                 ആഗ്രഹിക്കന്നവര്‍ത് ത്നിക്ക ഖണ്ഡിക മൂന്നില്‍
പ്രസിദ്ധന്റെടുത്തി പരാത്ി സമര്‍ത്െിക്കവാന്‍ 10                          നിഷ്്കര്‍ത്ഷ്ിച്ചിട്ടുള്ള             ക്ഷയാഗയത്കളന്റണ്ടന്നം
േിവസന്റത്ത സമയം നല്‍കുകയും                                      ഭിച്ച   അക്ഷയാഗയത്കളിന്റല്ലന്നം                       സത്യപ്രസ്താവന
പരാത്ികള്‍ക് പരിക്ഷശ്ാധിച്ച് അന്തിമ                      ിസ്റ്റ് 10     നല്‍ക്ഷകണ്ടത്ാെ്.                അപ്രകാരം                    ഭിക്കന്ന
േിവസത്തിനകം                      ക്ഷേത്രത്തിന്റെ       ക്ഷനാട്ടീസ്      അക്ഷപേകരന്റട വിവരം പരിക്ഷശ്ാധിച്ച് കരട്
ക്ഷ ാര്‍ത്ഡില്‍ പ്രസിദ്ധന്റെടുക്ഷത്തണ്ടതം ആയത്ിനു                          ിസ്റ്റ് ക്ഷേത്രത്തിന്റെ ക്ഷനാട്ടീസ് ക്ഷ ാര്‍ത്ഡില്‍
ക്ഷശ്ഷ്ം 7 േിവസത്തിനകം അക്ഷപേകരന്റട                                     പ്രസിദ്ധന്റെടുക്ഷത്തണ്ടതം                                ആയത്ിനു
ജനറല്‍ ക്ഷ ാഡി വിളിക്ഷകണ്ടതമാെ്. ജനറല്‍                                 ക്ഷ ാധിെിക്കന്നത്ിനായി                       ഭക്തജനങ്ങള്‍ക്ക്
ക്ഷ ാഡി വിളിക്കത്ിനുളള അറിയിെ് അത്ാത്്                                  കുറെത്് 7 ആക്ഷേപം േിവസം സമയം
ക്ഷേത്ര                     ക്ഷനാട്ടീസ്            ക്ഷ ാര്‍ത്ഡില്‍      നല്‍ക്ഷകണ്ടതം             കാ ാവധികകം                           കിട്ടുന്ന
പ്രസിദ്ധന്റെടുക്ഷത്തണ്ടത്ാെ്.                   ടി       ജനറല്‍         ആക്ഷേപങ്ങള്‍ക്                                        ക്ഷനാട്ടീസില്‍
ക്ഷ ാഡിയില്‍                    ക്ഷേവസവം           ഓ ീസറുന്റട           പ്രസിദ്ധീകരിച്ചിരിക്കന്ന                            ത്ിേത്ിയിലം
അധയേത്യില്‍ ക്ഷേത്ര ഉപക്ഷേശ്ക സമിത്ിന്റയ                                സമയത്തും                   ക്ഷേവസവം                      ഓ ീസര്‍ത്
ത്ിരന്റെടുക്ഷകണ്ടത്ാെ്.                     ത്ിരന്റെടുക്കത്ിന്          ഇരഭാഗന്റത്തയും                        ക്ഷകട്ട                 ക്ഷശ്ഷ്ം
ഒരാള്‍ക്ക് ഒരാളന്റട ക്ഷപര് നിര്‍ത്ക്ഷേശ്ികാവന്നതം                       ത്ീരമാനിക്ഷകണ്ടത്ാെ്. ആയത്ിനു ക്ഷശ്ഷ്ം
ഒരാള്‍ക്ക്                           പിന്താങ്ങാവന്നതമാെ്.               അന്തിമ           ിസ്റ്റ്    ക്ഷേത്രത്തിന്റെ               ക്ഷനാട്ടീസ്
അപ്രകാരമുളള ത്ിരന്റെടുെില്‍ സമവായം                                      ക്ഷ ാര്‍ത്ഡില്‍            പ്രസിദ്ധന്റെടുക്ഷത്തണ്ടത്ാെ്.
വരാത്ത പേം ന്റപാതക്ഷയാഗം നിര്‍ത്ത്തി ന്റവച്ച്                           ആയത്ിനു കുറെത്് 7 േിവസത്തിന് ക്ഷശ്ഷ്ം
ക്ഷേവസവം ഓ ീസര്‍ത് വിവരം ക്ഷ ാര്‍ത്ഡ് മുമ്പാന്റക                        അക്ഷപേകരന്റട                       ജനറല്‍                  ക്ഷ ാഡി
റിക്ഷൊര്‍ത്ട്ട് ന്റചക്ഷേണ്ടതം ക്ഷ ാര്‍ത്ഡിന്റെ പ്രക്ഷത്യക              വിളിക്ഷകണ്ടത്ാെ്.                    ജനറല്‍                ക്ഷ ാഡി
അനുമത്ി വാങ്ങി ക്ഷേത്ര ഉപക്ഷേശ്ക സമിത്ിന്റയ                             വിളിക്കന്നത്ിനുള്ള                 അറിയിെ്                  അത്ാത്്
ജനറല്‍              ക്ഷ ാഡി          അംഗങ്ങളില്‍            നിന്നം      ക്ഷേത്രത്തിന്റെ               ക്ഷനാട്ടീസ്            ക്ഷ ാര്‍ത്ഡില്‍
ക്ഷനാമിക്ഷനറ്റ് ന്റചോവന്നതം ആയത്് അസിസ്റ്റെ്                           പ്രസിദ്ധന്റെടുക്ഷത്തണ്ടത്ാെ്.                   ക്ഷഗാപുരങ്ങളള്ള
കമ്മീഷ്ണറുന്റട ശുപാര്‍ത്ശ് സഹിത്ം ക്ഷ ാര്‍ത്ഡ്                          ക്ഷേത്രങ്ങളില്‍           ക്ഷേത്ര             ക്ഷഗാപുരങ്ങളിലം
മുമ്പാന്റക                  സമര്‍ത്െിച്ച്           അംഗീകാരം            ഭക്തജനങ്ങള്‍ക്ക്               കാൊവന്ന                  ത്രത്തില്‍
വാക്ഷങ്ങണ്ടതമാെ്. ഇപ്രകാരമുളള പരമാവധി 21                                പ്രസിദ്ധന്റെടുക്ഷത്തണ്ടത്ാെ്.                     ടി         ജനറല്‍
ക്ഷപരന്റട              ിസ്റ്റില്‍    നിര്‍ത് ന്ധമായും           ഒര      ക്ഷ ാഡിയില്‍              ക്ഷേവസവം                   ഓ ീസറുന്റട
വനിത്യും                എസ്.സി./എസ്.ടി                 അംഗവം            അധയേത്യില്‍ ക്ഷേത്ര ഉപക്ഷേശ്ക സമിത്ിന്റയ
ഉണ്ടായിരികെം. ഭാരവാഹിത്വത്തില്‍ അച്ഛന്‍,                                ത്ിരന്റെടുക്ഷകണ്ടത്ാെ്. ത്ിരന്റെടുക്കന്നത്ിന്
അമ്മ, മകള്‍ക് എന്നിവരില്‍ നിന്നം ഒരാള്‍ക്                               ഒരാള്‍ക്ക് ഒരാളന്റട ക്ഷപര് നിര്‍ത്ക്ഷേശ്ികാവന്നതം
മാത്രക്ഷമ പാടുളളൂ.                                                      ഒരാള്‍ക്ക് പിന്താങ്ങാവന്നതമാെ്. അപ്രകാരം

വിളിച്ചുകൂട്ടുന്ന ക്ഷയാഗത്തില്‍ ന്റപാതധാരെയില്‍ സമവായത്തിലൂന്റട ഉപക്ഷേശ്ക സമിത്ിയിന്റ അംഗങ്ങന്റള ത്ിരന്റെടുക്ഷകണ്ടത്ിന് മുന്‍ഗെന നല്‍ക്ഷകണ്ടത്ാെ്. ന്റത്രന്റെടുക്ഷകണ്ട മുഴുവന്‍ അംഗങ്ങന്റളയും സമവായത്തിലൂന്റട 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 27 ത്ിരന്റെടുകന്റെടാന്റത് വന്നാല്‍ കുറവ് വരന്ന ഒഴിവിക്ഷ ക് നിര്‍ത്ക്ഷേശ്ിയ്ക്കന്റെട്ട മറ്റു ക്ഷപരകള്‍ക് ക്ഷേത്രാങ്കെത്തില്‍ ന്റവച്ച് ക്ഷേവസവം ഓ ീസര്‍ത് നറുന്റകടുെ് നടത്തി ത്ിരന്റെടുക്ഷകണ്ടത്ാെ്. കൂടുത്ല്‍ ആളകള്‍ക് നിര്‍ത്ക്ഷേശ്ികന്റെട്ടാല്‍ കൂടുത്ല്‍ ആയി ഉള്ള ആളകന്റള ഒഴിവാകാനായി നറുന്റകടുത്തു ത്ീരമാനിക്ഷകണ്ടത്ാെ്.

                                  സമവായത്ിലൂന്റടയും                     നറുന്റകടുെിലൂന്റടയും
                                  ത്ിരന്റെടുത്ത ക്ഷപരകാരന്റട                  ിസ്റ്റ് ക്ഷേവസവം
                                  ഓ ീസര്‍ത്            അസിസ്റ്റെ്            കമ്മീഷ്െര്‍ത്ക്ക
                                  സമര്‍ത്െിക്ഷകണ്ടതം              ആയത                അസിസ്റ്റെ്

കമ്മീഷ്െര്‍ത് ശുപാര്‍ത്ശ് സഹിത്ം ക്ഷ ാര്‍ത്ഡ് മുന്പാന്റക സമര്‍ത്െിച്ചു അംഗീകാരം വാക്ഷങ്ങണ്ടതമാെ്. ത്ിരന്റെടുകന്റെട്ട അംഗം രാജി ന്റവക്കകക്ഷയാ നീകം ന്റചേന്റെടുകക്ഷയാ ന്റചയ്താല്‍ ക്ഷമല്പറെ രീത്ിയില്‍ ആ ഒഴിവ നികത്തുവാന്‍ ക്ഷ ാര്‍ത്ഡിന് അധികാരം ഉണ്ടായിരിക്കന്നത്ാെ്. എന്നാല്‍ അത്തരം ന്റപാതക്ഷയാഗങ്ങള്‍ക് ക്ഷേവസവം കമ്മീഷ്െറുന്റട മുന്‍കൂര്‍ത് അനുവാേക്ഷത്താന്റട വിളിച്ചു ക്ഷചര്‍ത്ക്ഷകണ്ടത്ാെ്. ഇപ്രകാരമുള്ള പരമാവധി 15 ക്ഷപരന്റട ിസ്റ്റില്‍ നിര്‍ത് ന്ധമായും ഒര വനിത്യും ഒര എസ്.സി./എസ്.ടി അംഗവം ഉണ്ടായിരികെം. ക്ഷേത്ര ഉപക്ഷേശ്ക സമിത്ി ഭാരവാഹിത്വത്തില്‍ ഒര കുടും ത്തില്‍ നിന്ന (അച്ഛന്‍, അമ്മ, മകള്‍ക് എന്നിവരില്‍ നിന്നം) ഒരാള്‍ക് മാത്രക്ഷമ പാടുളളൂ.

26. A reading of clause (3) of the bye-law (Rules) framed under sub-section (3) of Section 76A of the Act prior to the modification made by the order of this Court dated 18.03.2024 in DBP No.5 of 2021 and that after such modification, make it explicitly clear that the eligibility clause with reference to the traditional boundaries of the temple has not undergone any modification whatsoever and it remains as such. In the instant case, the petitioner is a resident of Kadavanthra (K.P.Vallon Road), 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 28 which is beyond the traditional boundaries of Chottanikkara Devi Temple. The place Kadavanthra is at a distance of about 15 kms. away from Chottanikkara Devi Temple. When the eligibility for membership in the registered mandalam of the devotees for being elected as members of the Temple Advisory Committee in the temples under the management of Cochin Devaswom Board is governed by the provisions contained in clause (3) of the bye-law (Rules) framed under sub-section (3) of Section 76A of the Act, the draft list published by the Devaswom Manager of the concerned Devaswom shall contain only the name of those devotees who fall within the eligibility criteria prescribed under the said rules. In the writ petition the petitioner has not pointed out any instances of inclusion of any ineligible person in Ext.P2 draft list. No such ineligible person are arrayed as respondent in the writ petition. The modification to clause (3) of the bye-law (Rules) framed under sub-section (3) of Section 76A of the Act are made in order to ensure that only the devotees who fall within the eligibility criteria alone are included in the registered mandalam of devotees and that the formation of a Temple Advisory Committee consisting of the devotees in the registered mandalam is 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 29 conducted and fair and transparent manner, instead of the existing practice of the Devaswom Manager forwarding a list of devotees to the Assistant Devaswom Commissioner, when there was no consensus among the devotees in the general body. As per clause (3) of the bye-law (Rules), one woman and one member belonging to scheduled caster/scheduled tribe shall mandatorily be included in the Temple Advisory Committee. Therefore, we find absolutely no merits in the contention of the petitioner that clause (3) of the bye-law (Rules) framed under sub-section (3) of Section 76A of the Act requires modification.

In the result, we find absolutely no merits in this writ petition. The petitioner is not entitled to any of the reliefs sought for in this writ petition. The writ petition fails and the same is accordingly dismissed.

Sd/-

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE Sd/-

P. V. BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE scl 2025:KER:36460 W.P.(C)No.19044 of 2025 30 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19044/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit- P1 THE COPY OF THE APPLICATION OF MEMBERSHIP IN TEMPLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE DATED 11/05/2025 BY PAYING ITS FEE AS RS. 25/-

Exhibit-P2 THE COPY OF THE LIST PUBLISHED BY THE DEVASWOM BOARD DATED 15/5/2025 Exhibit P3 THE COPY OF OBJECTION DATED 16/5/2025 Exhibit-P4. THE COPY OF THE BYE-LAW RESPONDENT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R 1 ( a ) A true copy of earlier bye-laws of the Temple Advisory Committee

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Kerala High Court