This court dismissed a writ petition challenging the appointment of a temple priest based on birth. The court dismissed the matter as infructuous because the 4th respondent died, though it reserved legal contentions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
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 18TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 26TH ASWINA, 1944
W.P.(C) NO.6105OF 2014
PETITIONER:
P. NARAYANAN, AGED 42 YEARS,
S/O. NARAYANAN NAMBEESAN (LATE), NARAMANGALATH VEEDU,
P. O. PULPATTA, MAJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.)
SMT.ASHA BABU
SMT.AMMU CHARLES
SRI.M.MANOJKUMAR CHELAKKADAN
SRI.S.M.PRASANTH
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE(DEVASWOM), GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.2 THE GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM MANAGING COMMITTEE, REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680101.3 THE COMMISSIONER, GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680101.4 SRI. P.C. NARAYANAN NAMBOOTHIRIPAD, AGED 65 YEARS, S/O. LATE P.C. PARAMESWARAN NAMBOOTHIRIPAD, PUZHAKKARA CHENNAS MANA, VENKIDANGU P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT680510.ADDITIONAL R5 TO R10 IMPLEADED
5 P.C.KRISHNAN, PUZHAKKARA CHENNAS MANA, NARANIPPUZHA ROAD, ERAMANGALAM.P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -679587.W.P.(C)No.6105 OF 2014
2
6 P.C.HARI, PUZHAKKARA CHENNAS MANA, NARANIPPUZHA ROAD, ERAMANGALAM.P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -679587.7 P.C.ARAVINDKSHAN, PUZHAKKARA CHENNAS MANA, NARANIPPUZHA ROAD, ERAMANGALAM.P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -679587.8 P.C.JAYAKUMAR, PUZHAKKARA CHENNAS MANA, NARANIPPUZHA ROAD, ERAMANGALAM.P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -679587.9 P.C.SATHEESH KUMAR, PUZHAKKARA CHENNAS MANA, NARANIPPUZHA ROAD, ERAMANGALAM.P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -679587.10 P.C.SRIKANTH NARAYANAN, PUZHAKKARA CHENNAS MANA, NARANIPPUZHA ROAD, ERAMANGALAM.P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -679587.ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 5 TO 10 IMPLEADED AS PER THE
ORDER DATED 14.07.2014 IN I.A.NO.7792 OF 2014
BY ADVS.
SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR
SMT.M.C.BINDUMOL
SRI.P.GOPAL
SRI.K.RAMACHANDRAN
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI. S. RAJMOHAN- SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
18.10.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C)No.6105 OF 2014
3
JUDGMENT
Anil K. Narendran, J.
The petitioner, who is a devotee of Sree Krishna Temple, Guruvayur has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to declare that the thrusting of a person who is not equipped or possesses the knowledge of thantric rites only by reason of his birth in a particular family as Thantri of the Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple is violative of Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India and liable to be declared bad in law, unconstitutional and set aside. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to appoint only a person who possesses thantric rites, performance of poojas, etc., in accordance with Hindu faith and belief from the Chennas Mana as Thantri of the Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple; a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to appoint only a duty qualified, equipped and knowledgeable persons in performance of thantric and religious rites as Thantri of the Guruvayur Temple and not merely based on his birth in the Chennas Mana; and a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to permit the 4th respondent to continue as Thantri only after his knowledge, equipment, experience, etc., to perform thantric rites is assessed
W.P.(C)No.6105 OF 2014
4
by a competent religious body or experts.
the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the 4th respondent is no more and the relief sought for in this writ petition have become infructuous. Therefore, leaving open the legal and factual contentions raised in the writ petition, the same may be dismissed as infructuous.
Based on the aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous; however leaving open the legal and factual contentions raised by both sides.
Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE
Sd/-
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE
MIN
W.P.(C)No.6105 OF 2014
5
APPENDIX OF W.P.(C)No.6105 OF 2014
EXHIBIT R4(A) TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT DATED
5.2.2014 FILED BY THE PRESENT 4TH RESPONDENT
IN W.P.(C)No.2566 OF 2014
P. Narayanan
State of Kerala
Guruvayoor Devaswom Managing Committee
Commissioner, Guruvayoor Devaswom
P.C. Narayanan Namboothiripad
Anil K. Narendran
P.G. Ajithkumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court