Disposed

The Cochin Devaswom Board v. Sasi K

Kerala HC9 Feb 2023RP/174/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a review petition regarding a writ petition concerning the Cheranalloor Temple Advisory Committee. The Court reserved the original judgment orders but directed the Board to form a special committee within two days for the upcoming temple festival and secure the collection amount and accounts from the incumbent office bearers.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Board to constitute a committee for the annual temple festival within two days and to secure the festival collection amount and accounts from the respondents for audit.

The Cochin Devaswom Board Vs Sasi K — Cooperative Societies | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶3

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR

¶5

THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 20TH MAGHA, 1944
RP NO. 174 OF 2023

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.01.2023 IN WP(C)NO.29526 OF
2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶7

REVIEW PETITIONERS:

¶8

1 THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, SWARAJ ROUND N, ROUND NORTH, THRISSUR, KERALA, PIN - 680001

¶9

2 THE CHERANALLOOR SREE KARTHYAYANI BHAGAVATHI TEMPLE,CHERANALLOOR, EDAPPALLY, COCHIN REP. BY THE DEVASWOM OFFICER, C.K. SWAMI DEASWOM, SOUTH CHITTOR, COCHIN, PIN - 682027 BY ADV K.P.SUDHEER

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 SASI K., AGED 58 YEARS, S/O. KANNAN, KADERIPARAMBU HOUSE, SOUTH CHITTOOR, EDAYAKKUNNAM TEMPLE ROAD, CHERANALLOOR, COCHIN, PIN - 682027

¶12

2 O. CHANDRASEKHARAN, AGED 65 YEARS PRESIDENT, TEMPLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, CHERANALLOOR SREE KARTHYAYANI BHAGAVATHI TEMPLE, CHERANALLOOR, EDAPPALLY, COCHIN, PIN - 682034

¶13

3 M.R CHANDRASEKHARAN, AGED 62 YEARS SECRETARY, TEMPLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, CHERANALLOOR SREE KARTHYAYANI BHAGAVATHI TEMPLE, CHERANALLOOR, EDAPPALLY, COCHIN, PIN - 682034

¶14

4 V. JAYAKUMAR, AGED 61 YEARS, TREASURER, TEMPLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, CHERANALLOOR SREE KARTHYAYANI BHAGAVATHI TEMPLE, CHERANALLOOR, EDAPPALLY, COCHIN, PIN - 682034 R1 BY ADV.SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY R2 TO 4 BY ADV.SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR

¶15

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶16

09.02.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

R.P.No.174 of 2023

ORDER

Anil K. Narendran, J.

¶21

Cochin Devaswom Board and another have filed this review petition, invoking the provisions under Section 114 and Order XLVII, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking review of the judgment dated 18.01.2023 in W.P.(C)No.29526 of 2022. That writ petition was one filed by the 1^st respondent herein, who is a devotee of Lord Karthyayani of Cheranalloor Sree Karthyayani Bhagavathi Temple, which is a temple under the management of Cochin Devaswom Board, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the Cochin Devaswom Board to remove respondents 3 to 5 therein, who were the President, Secretary and Treasurer of the Temple Advisory Committee of Cheranalloor Sree Karthyayani Bhagavathi Temple, and other members in that Temple Advisory Committee, and immediately convene a General Body meeting to hold election to elect a proper panel of 19 devotees to constitute a new Temple Advisory Committee in the said temple; and a writ of mandamus commanding the Cochin Devaswom Board to conduct compulsory audit of the entire accounts, books and records of the successive Temple Advisory Committees in the Cheranalloor Sree Karthyayani Bhagavathi Temple for the period from 2010 onwards, till date, including the accounts with reference to Dwajaprathishta,

¶22

¶23

R.P.No.174 of 2023

¶24

Kalasam, renovation and civil works done in the temple Sreekovil and ancillary buildings, sale of Nilavilakku, lamps and vessels from the temple and the alleged replacements and the amounts illegally withdrawn by respondents 3 to 5 therein and other members of the Temple Advisory Committee and the furniture, mike sets etc. taken away by them from the temple office illegally even after their resignation from 05.02.2020 and to identify misappropriation and diversion of funds, if any, and the persons responsible for the same and to permanently debar such individuals from ever functioning as members and/or office bearers of the Temple Advisory Committee at any time hereafter. In that writ petition, this Court passed an interim order dated 07.10.2022, which reads thus;

¶25

“Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 16.09.2022, the learned Standing Counsel for Cochin Devaswom Board has made available for the perusal of this Court the relevant files relating to the nomination of the Temple Advisory Committee of Cheranalloor Sree Karthyayani Bhagavathi Temple.

¶26

The specific allegations raised in the writ petition is that respondents 3 to 5 and other members of the Temple Advisory Committee are continuing as such for the last 12 years. The term of the Temple Advisory Committee as per the relevant rules is two years, which can be extended in a special circumstances for a further period of one year.

¶27

The learned Standing Counsel and also the learned

¶28

¶29

R.P.No.174 of 2023

¶30

counsel for respondents 3 to 5 seeks time to file counter affidavit in order to explain the facts and circumstances. 4. List this matter for further consideration on 11.10.2022. There will be an interim order restraining the Temple Advisory Committee of Cheranalloor Sree Karthyayani Bhagavathi Temple from taking decisions on any development works in the Temple, for a period of one month.” 2. By judgment dated 18.01.2023, W.P.(C)No.29526 of

¶31

2022 was disposed of, taking note of the law laid down by this Court in Sunil Kumar C. and others v. Travancore Devaswom Board and others [2022 (4) KHC 663] . Paragraphs 5 to 7 and also the operative portion of that judgment read thus;

¶32

“5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for Cochin Devaswom Board for respondents 1 and 2, and also the learned counsel for respondents 3 to 5. Insofar as the relief sought for in this writ petition in respect of the auditing of accounts of the Temple Advisory Committee of Cheranalloor Sree Karthyayani Bhagavathi Temple is concerned, the matter is now pending consideration before the learned Ombudsman in DBP No.14 of 2022. The petitioner can file an application for impleadment in DBP No.14 of 2022. The legal and factual contentions raised by both sides on the above issue are left open to be raised before the appropriate forum.

¶33

Insofar as the election of a new Temple Advisory Committee in Cheranalloor Sree Karthyayani Bhagavathi Temple is concerned, the fact that respondents 3 to 5 are continuing as the office bearers of the Temple Advisory

¶34

¶35

R.P.No.174 of 2023

¶36

Committee from the year 2010 onwards is not in dispute. The said fact is also admitted in paragraph No.3 of the counter affidavit filed by the said respondents.

¶37

In Sunil Kumar C. and others v. Travancore

¶38

Devaswom Board and others [2022 (4) KHC 663] in the context of the provision under Section 31A of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950, which deals with constitution of Temple Advisory Committees in temples under the management of Travancore Devaswom Board, this Court held as follows:

¶39

“59. As already noticed, in view of the provisions contained in Clause (2) and Clause (11) of Ext.P1 Rules, the construction or repair or renovation work that has to be undertaken in a temple is not outside the purview of the Temple Advisory Committee constituted under Section 31A of the Act. The term of the Temple Advisory Committee is two years from the date of approval of the election by the Devaswom Commissioner, who has the authority to extend the term by one year in case of development works or unavoidable rituals in the temple. The Board has the power to extend the term by a further period of one year in case of development works or unavoidable rituals in the temple. In view of the prohibition contained in Clause (11) of Ext.P1 Rules, the term of the Temple Advisory Committee cannot be extended beyond the period of two years. In view of the prohibition contained in clause (18), a person, who is an office bearer or member of the Temple Advisory Committee is not eligible to continue as such, continuously exceeding the term of two Committees. Respondents 6 to 10 were in the Temple Advisory Committee continuously for a period of four years from 13.03.2017 till 12.03.2021. As held by this Court in Chandu K. v. Travancore Devaswom Board [2021

¶40

¶41

R.P.No.174 of 2023

¶42

(3) KHC 379] the power of the Devaswom Commissioner or the Board to extend the term of the Temple Advisory Committee shall not be exercised as a matter of course. The Devaswom Commissioner or the Board, as the case may be, shall call for a report regarding the developmental works going on in the temple concerned or the unavoidable rituals to be carried out in the temple and apply its mind to the materials and take a decision as to whether extension of term has to be given or not.”

¶43

The provision under Section 76A of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act deals with constitution of Temple Advisory Committees in the temples under the management of Cochin Devaswom Board. The composition of the Temple Advisory Committee is governed by the provisions contained in the rules framed by the Cochin Devaswom Board under sub-Section (3) of Section 76A of the Act. Clause 13 of Ext.R3(h) rules (bye law) deals with term of the Temple Advisory Committee. A reading of the said provision would make it clear that the law laid down by this Court in Sunil Kumar C [2022 (4) KHC 663] in the context of Section 31A of the Act will have application with equal force in the matter of constitution of Temple Advisory Committees under Section 76A of the said Act, in temples under the management of Cochin Devaswom Board.

¶44

In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the Devaswom Officer of the 2^nd respondent Cheranalloor Sree Karthyayani Bhagavathi Temple to convene a meeting of the registered mandalam of the devotees for electing members to the Temple Advisory Committee of the said temple, after complying with the statutory requirements. Necessary steps in this regard shall be initiated, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within

¶45

¶46

R.P.No.174 of 2023

¶47

a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment and the entire process shall be completed within a further period of two months.”

¶48

The Board and another has filed this review petition,

¶49

on the ground that, when W.P.(C)No.29526 of 2022 was disposed of by the judgment dated 18.01.2023, it could not brought to the notice of this Court that the Temple festival has to commence on 27.02.2023.

¶50

Heard the learned Standing Counsel for Cochin Devaswom Board for the petitioners, the learned counsel for the 1^st respondent/writ petitioner and also the learned counsel for respondents 2 to 4/respondents 3 to 5 in the writ petition.

¶51

During the course of arguments, the learned counsel

¶52

for the 1^st respondent/writ petitioner would point out the procedure adopted by the Board in the year 2021, for conducting annual temple festival in Cheranalloor Sree Karthyayani Bhagavathi Temple, by constituting a Committee of 10 members for that limited purpose, with provision for proper audit of accounts, etc.

¶53

The learned Standing Counsel for Cochin Devaswom Board would submit that, since some more time is required to constitute a new Temple Advisory Committee, in terms of the directions contained in the judgment dated 18.01.2023 in

¶54

¶55

R.P.No.174 of 2023 W.P.(C)No.29526 of 2022, the Board shall adopt the very same procedure for the annual festival, which has to commence on 27.02.2023, by constituting a Committee for the limited purpose

¶56

of conducting the said festival.

¶57

The learned counsel for the 1^st respondent/writ petitioner would point out the allegations contained in Ext.P4 representation made by the staff of Cheranalloor Sree Karthyayani Bhagavathi Temple, which was addressed to the Secretary of the Board, regarding certain issues in the temple festival of the year 2021, which was conducted in terms of Ext.P2 order.

¶58

The learned Standing Counsel for Cochin Devaswom Board would submit that the petitioner herein shall take necessary steps to ensure that no such incidents are repeated during the festival of the year 2023.

¶59

The learned counsel for respondents 2 to 4, who are arrayed as respondents 3 to 5 in the writ petition, would submit that the said respondents have absolutely no intention to create any issues during the temple festival of the year 2023, they being the devotees of Cheranalloor Sree Karthyayani Bhagavathi Temple. The learned counsel would also submit that proper accounts for the amount collected by the Temple Advisory

¶60

¶61

R.P.No.174 of 2023

¶62

Committee, in connection with temple festival of the year 2023, shall be submitted before the Devaswom Officer, within two days. In the above circumstances, this review petition is disposed

¶63

of by directing the 1^st petitioner Cochin Devaswom Board to constitute a Committee for conducting annual festival in Cheranalloor Sree Karthyayani Bhagavathi Temple for the current year, which is to commence on 27.02.2023, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two days, by adopting the procedure that was followed in the year 2021, as evidenced by Ext.P2 in the writ petition. Within two days, respondents 2 to 4 shall handover the amount collected by the Temple Advisory Committee in connection with the temple festival of the year 2023 along with statement of accounts, which shall be subjected to proper audit as per the statutory requirements within the stipulated time limit. Respondents 2 to 4 herein shall not be included in the committee to be constituted by the Board for the purpose of conducting annual festival for the current year. Any issues similar to that pointed out in Ext.P4 representation made by the staff of Cheranalloor Sree Karthyayani Bhagavathi Temple, for the conduct of annual festival for the current year shall be brought to the notice of this

¶64

Court by the petitioners herein by submittting a proper

¶65

¶66

R.P.No.174 of 2023

¶67

application, which shall be numbered as DBA and listed before the Devaswom Bench.

¶68

Subject to the above modification, all other directions in

¶69

the judgment dated 18.01.2023 in W.P.(C)No.29526 of 2022

¶70

shall continue as such.

¶71

Sd/-

¶72

ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE

¶73

Sd/-

¶74

P.G. AJITHKUMAR JUDGE

R.P.No.174 of 2023

APPENDIX

REVIEW PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES:

¶80

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 28.1.2023
ISSUED BY THE DEVASWOM OFFICER, C.K.
SWAMI DEVASWOM.
ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO. M4. 16/2013
DATED 24.1.2023 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER, THRIPUNITHURA GROUP TO
THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER.
ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. A5.6958/2022
DATED 31.1.2023 ISSUED BY THE DEVASWOM
COMMISSIONER IN CHARGE.

The Cochin Devaswom Board v. Sasi K

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Cochin Devaswom Board v. Sasi K

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Remsi.a. Vs Muneer. M

A.L.Varadarajan, Vs State of Kerala

Hari Krishnan Vs S. Padmakumar

Hasheen Mehmood Vs Salman Bin Ameer Ali

Suo Motu Vs Travancore Devaswom Board - Tdb

Reeba Joseph Vs Binil Abraham