Dismissed

Kottayam Sree Thrikkaikunnu Mahadeva Temple v. Malabar Devaswom Board

Kerala HC2 Mar 2021WP(C)/301/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged an order quashing temple administration duties and interfering with judicial supervision. The court held an alternative statutory remedy exists under the Madras Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Act, dismissing the writ petition without entertaining merits.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; petitioner allowed to avail alternative statutory remedy under Section 61.

Kottayam Sree Thrikkaikunnu Mahadeva Temple… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN

¶6

TUESDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1942

¶7

WP(C).No.301 OF 2021(K)

¶8

PETITIONERS:

¶9

1 KOTTAYAM SREE THRIKKAIKUNNU MAHADEVA TEMPLE BUILDING NO. 74, WARD NO. IV, KOTTAYAM (MALABAR), AMSOM DESOM, THALASSERY TALUK-670 101, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT.

¶10

2 KOTTAYAM SREE THRIKKAIKUNNU MAHADEVA KSHETRA SAMRAKSHANA SAMITHY TRUST,

¶11

REG. NO. 1861/99, BUILDING NO. 74, WARD NO. IV, KOTTAYAM (MALABAR) AMSOM DESOM, THALASSERY TALUK-670 101, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT.

¶12

BY ADVS.

¶13

SRI.K.LAKSHMINARAYANAN SMT.SATHYASHREE PRIYA EASWARAN

¶14

RESPONDENTS:

¶15

1 MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD HOUSEFED COMPLEX, MINI BYPASS ROAD, ERANHIPPALAM, KOZHIKODE, KERALA-673 006

¶16

2 COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, HOUSEFED COMPLEX, MINI BYPASS ROAD, ERANHIPPALAM, KOZHIKODE, KERALA-673 006.

¶17

3 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, HOUSEFED COMPLEX, MINI BYPASS ROAD, ERANHIPPALAM, KOZHIKODE, KERALA 673 006.

¶18

4 K.K. RAVIVARMA, KIZHAKKE KOVILAKAM, KOTTAYAM MALABAR P.O, KANNUR-670 673

¶19

5 KOTTAYAM THEKKE KOVILAKATH KERALA VARMA VALIYA RAJA, RAROTH AMSOM, KEETAVOOR DESOM, THAMARASSERY TALUK.

¶20

W.P.(C).301/2021

¶21

¶22

6 K.K. RAJARAJA VARMA, KIZHAKKE KOVILAKAM, KOTTAYAM MALABAR P.O, KANNUR-670 643

¶23

7 K.K. SUBADRA, KIZHAKKE KOVILAKAM, KOTTAYAM MALABAR P.O, KANNUR-670643

¶24

8 SATHEESAN K.K, KIZHAKKE KOVILAKAM, KOTTAYAM MALABAR P.O, KANNUR-670 643

¶25

9 P.K. KERALA VARMA RAJA PADINJARE KOVILAKAM, KOTTAYAM MALABAR P.O, KANNUR-670 643

¶26

10 P.K. RAVI VARMA RAJA, PADINJARE KOVILAKAM, KOTTAYAM MALABAR P.O, KANNUR-670 643

¶27

11 K. MURALI, VAZHAYIL HOUSE, KOTTAYAM MALABAR P.O, KANNUR 670 643

¶28

12 DHANEESH V.P, VADAKKAYIL HOUSE, KOTTAYAM MALABAR P.O, KANNUR-670 643

¶29

13 NARAYANAN K.P, CHIRAKKAL PARAMBA, KOTTAYAM MALABAR P.O, KANNUR-670 643

¶30

14 PRASANTH KUMAR A.V, CHIRAKKAL PARAMBA, KOTTAYAM MALABAR P.O, KANNUR-670 643

¶31

15 VINEESH P, CHIRAKKAL PARAMBA, KOTTAYAM MALABAR P.O, KANNUR-670 643

¶32

16 UNNIKRISHNAN P.C, KIZHAKKE KOVILAKAM, CHIRAKKAL PARAMBA, KOTTAYAM MALABAR P.O, KANNUR-670 643 SRI.R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN, SC, MDB R17 BY ADV. B.KRISHNAN R17 BY ADV. SRI.R.PARTHASARATHY

¶33

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P.(C).301/2021

JUDGMENT

Ravikumar, J.

The petitioners filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs:-

¶39

A To issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing Exhibit-P5 order dated 05-11-2020 issued by the 3^rd respondent, after calling for its records, as the same is passed in violation of natural justice.

¶40

B To issue such other writ, order or direction not to interfere with the day to day affairs of the 1^st petitioner temple, as the temple is administered under the supervision of the Advocate Commissioner as per the directions issued by this Honourable court in I.A 4493/07 in RFA 382/06.

¶41

Obviously, a scanning of the pleadings in the writ petition would

¶42

reveal that the grievance of the petitioners is against Ext.P5 order passed by

¶43

the third respondent in exercise of the power under Section 57(a) of the Madras Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Act (for short, 'HR & CE Act'). It is the contention that the third respondent passed the order beyond the scope of the said power under Section 57(a) of the HR & CE Act inasmuch as it does not empower taking over of a temple by the Board. That apart, it is contended that Ext.P5 order is passed in clear violation of the interim order dated 30.11.2007 passed by this Court in I.A No.4493/2007 in a pending Regular First Appeal viz., RFA No.382/2008. The learned standing counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3 would submit that since the

¶44

W.P.(C).301/2021

¶45

¶46

impugned Ext.P5 order was passed invoking the power under Section 57(a) of the HR & CE Act, a statutory remedy is available to any person aggrieved by the said order in terms of the provisions under Section 61 thereof.

¶47

We have carefully considered the aforesaid rival submissions. The very case of the petitioners is that Ext.P5 is passed in violation of the order dated 30.11.2007 in I.A No.4493/2007 in RFA No.382/2008 which is still pending before this Court. The indisputable fact is that Ext.P5 order is passed under Section 57(a) of HR & CE Act and therefore, any person aggrieved by an order passed by the Deputy Commissioner under Section 57(a) can avail remedy under Section 61 of the HR & CE Act. Thus, it is obvious that there are alternatives available to the petitioner to remedy the grievance. In the light of the position that when an alternative remedy is available, a writ petition filed under Article 226 need be entertained in exceptional cases, we do not find any reason to entertain the writ petition in the absence of any such

¶48

exceptional circumstances. Ergo, without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to avail the remedies open to them, this writ petition is dismissed.

¶49

Sd/-

¶50

C.T.RAVIKUMAR JUDGE

¶51

Sd/MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE

W.P.(C).301/2021

APPENDIX

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

¶56

EXHIBIT P1	A TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 21.07.1999.	TRUST DEED NO. 1861
EXHIBIT P2	A TRUE COPY OF THE IN OS 2/03 ON THE COURT, THALASSERY.	DECREE DATED 17.07.2006 FILE OF THE DISTRICT
EXHIBIT P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE IN IA 4493/07 IN RFA THIS HON'BLE COURT.	ORDER DATED 30.11.2007 382/08 ON THE FILE OF
EXHIBIT P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE O 2/03 ON THE FILE O THALASSERY.	RDER IN IA 113/08 IN OS F THE DISTRICT COURT,
EXHIBIT P5	A TRUE COPY OF THE IN OA 5/20 PASSED BY	ORDER DATED 05.11.2020 THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶57

spc/

Kottayam Sree Thrikkaikunnu Mahadeva Temple v. Malabar Devaswom Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kottayam Sree Thrikkaikunnu Mahadeva Temple v. Malabar Devaswom Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sree Mulayankavu Bhagavathy Devaswom Vs the District Collector

K.Haridas Vs the District Collector

Travancore Devaswom Board , Vs Deputy Examiner for Local Fund Audit

Travancore Devaswom Board, Vs Deputy Examiner for Local Fund Audit

Binoy P Vs State of Kerala

The Zamorin Raja of Calicut, Vs the State of Kerala