Kerala High Court
V.A.Paul @ Paul Antony Vadassery vs Cochin Devaswom Board on 14 December, 2021
Author: Anil K. Narendran
Bench: Anil K.Narendran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
Tuesday, the 14th day of December 2021 / 23rd Agrahayana, 1943
WP(C) NO. 22913 OF 2020(L)
PETITIONER:
V.A.PAUL @ PAUL ANTHONY VADASSERY, AGED 72 YEARS, S/O. LATE V.P
ANTONY., PERMANENT RESIDENT OF VADASSERY HOUSE, MARAMPALLY ROAD,
PALLURUTHY, KOCHI 682 006 AND PRESENTLY RESIDING AT OMAIR TRAVEL
AGENCY BUILDING, FLAT NO. 52, KHALIFA STREET, KHALIFA, ABUDHABI,
POST BOX NO. 31587 UNITED ARAB EMIRATES, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF
ATTORNEY HOLDER O. BABU YOHANNAN, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O. OONNUNNY,
ARIYATTIL HOUSE, VALUMMEL ROAD, THOPPUMPADY, KOCHI 682 005
RESPONDENTS:
1. COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEVASWOM BOARD
BUILDING, THRISSUR 680 001.
2. SPECIAL THAHASILDAR, LC UNIT, COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, OFFICE OF
COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, THRISSUR 680 001.
3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM-682030
4. CORPORATION OF COCHIN, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KOCHI MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION, P.B NO. 1016, COCHIN- 682 011.
5. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, 1ST FLOOR, K.B JACOB ROAD, FORT KOCHI-
682 001.
Writ petition (civil) praying inter alia that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed along with the WP(C) the High Court be
pleased to recall the order and stay all further proceedings pursuant to
the issuance of interim direction of this Hon'ble Court dated 24-07-2020
in WP(C) No. 13816/20 directing the 5th respondent RDO to conduct an
enquiry by relying on Exhibit P4 and Exhibit P5 orders, pending diposal of
the writ petition.
This petition again coming on for orders upon perusing the petition
and the affidavit filed in support of WP(C) and this Court's order dated
18-03-2021 and 24-02-2021 and upon hearing the arguments of M/S. SIVAN
MADATHIL & P.USHAKUMARI, Advocates for the petitioner, SRI.MOHAMMED ANZAR
K.J., SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER for respondents 2,3 & 5 and of
M/S.P.SAREENA GEORGE & ARUN ANTONY, Advocates for the respondent 4, the
court passed the following:
P.T.O.
EXHIBIT P4:TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26-04-2019 ISSUED BY THE
SECOND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5:TRUE COPY OF THE C-FORM NOTICE DATED 26-04-2019 ISSUED BY
THE SECOND RESPONDENT.
ANIL K. NARENDRAN & P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JJ.
-----------------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C)Nos.6753, 12173, 13816, 13965, 18492, 22913 of 2020
------------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th day of December, 2021
ORDER
Anil K. Narendran, J.
'Deva' means God and 'swom' means ownership in Sanskrit and the term 'Devaswom' denotes the property of God in common parlance. [see: Prayar Gopalakrishnan and another v. State of Kerala and others - 2018 (1) KHC 536] 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 'fences 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 W.P.(C)Nos.6753, 12173, 13816, 13965, 18492, 22913 of 2020 2 wrongful claims or misappropriation.
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 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 parents 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.
Despite the order of this Court dated 24.07.2020, the official respondents have not chosen to file counter affidavit.
Two weeks time granted to the official respondents to file counter W.P.(C)Nos.6753, 12173, 13816, 13965, 18492, 22913 of 2020 3 affidavit as last chance.
In case no counter affidavit is filed, the concerned official respondents shall be personally present in Court along with the relevant files.
W.P.(C)No.22913 of 2020
One of the reliefs sought for in this writ petition is stay of further proceedings pursuant to the issuance of interim order of this Court dated 24.07.2020 in W.P.(C)No.13816 of 2020 by directing the Revenue Divisional Officer to conduct enquiry based on Exts.P4 to P5 orders.
The learned counsel for the petitioner to address arguments as to the maintainability of such a relief in a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is also pointed out by Adv. M.P. Akshok Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.13816 of 2020 that while seeking such a relief, the petitioner has not chosen to implead the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.13816 of 2020, Hindu Ayikka Vedi as a party to this writ petition.
The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks a short adjournment to answer the aforesaid contentions.
The learned Senior Government Pleader would submit that the report and sketch prepared by the Special Tahsildar (LC Unit), Cochin W.P.(C)Nos.6753, 12173, 13816, 13965, 18492, 22913 of 2020 4 Devaswom Board in obedience to the order of this Court dated 24.02.2021, which has already been placed on record along with a memo in W.P.(C)No.22913 of 2020 shall be placed on record in the connected writ petitions as well.
List on 11.01.2022, along with connected cases.
Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE Sd/-
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE MIN 14-12-2021 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar