Allowed

R.Jayarajan, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Jan 2023WP(C)/35399/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench disposed of a writ petition by the holder of the right to collect fees for Chendamelam during Pettathullal. Observing the statutory duty of the Devaswom Board to perform traditional rites, the Court made an interim protection order dated 20.12.2022 absolute, directing law enforcement to ensure peace for all parties during the festival season.

What did the court decide?

Interim order dated 20.12.2022 making adequate and effective protection for the petitioner and ensuring law and order directed to the third and fifth respondents by- making the order absolute.

R.Jayarajan, Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

&

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR

¶6

FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023/16TH POUSHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 35399 OF 2022

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

R.JAYARAJAN, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O. RAMACHANDRAN
CHETTIYAR, GEETHA BHAVAN, ERUMELY P.O., KOTTAYAM
DISTRICT.,PIN 686509.

¶9

BY ADVS.P.HARIDAS
SHIJIMOL M.MATHEW
BIJU HARIHARAN
RISHIKESH HARIDAS
P.C.SHIJIN(K/397/2012)
GREESHMA T.G.

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN - 695001.

¶12

2 DISTRICT COLLECTOR & DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, OFFICE OF DISTRICT COLLECTOR & DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM. PIN - 686002.

¶13

3 DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, KOTTAYAM. NEAR KOTTAYAM EAST POLICE STATION, DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE, KOTTAYAM - KUMILY RD, COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686002.

¶14

4 TAHSILDAR & EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE, OFFICE OF THE TAHSILDAR & EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE, TALUK OFFICE, KANJIRAPPALLY. PIN - 686 506.

¶15

5 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ERUMELY POLICE STATION. PIN - 686 509.

¶16

-2-

¶17

W.P.(C).No.35399 of 2022

¶18

6 TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS
SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM
BOARD, NANTHANCODE, KOWDIAR P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN 695 003.

¶19

7

¶20

DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM
NANTHANCODE, BOARD, DEVASWOM COMMISSIONERATE,
KOWDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN 695 003 .

¶21

8

¶22

DEPUTY DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER,
TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, THIRUVALLA,
PATHANAMTHITTA. PIN - 689101.

¶23

¶24

ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER,
TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, MUNDAKAYAM GROUP,
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
MUNDAKAYAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. PIN - 686513.

¶25

10
SABU, S/O. CHELLAPPAN, HOUSE NO. 500, WARD NO.
V., KAVUNKAL, KANAKAPPALAM P.O., ERUMELY. PIN
- 686509.

¶26

11

¶27

GOPI, S/O. RAGHAVAN, PATHIKKAKAVU, HOUSE NO.
672, WARD NO. V., KAVUNKAL, KANAKAPPALAM P.O.,
ERUMELY. PIN - 686509.

¶28

R BY ADVS.SRI.R.KRISHNA RAJ
 SRI.HARIDAS
 SRI.S.SONI
 KUMARI SANGEETHA S.NAIR
 SMT.RESMI A.

¶29

R BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SRI. S RAJMOHAN,
R BY SRI. G BIJU, SC, TDB

¶30

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 06.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶31

W.P.(C).No.35399 of 2022

¶32

-3-

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

Anil K. Narendran, J.

¶35

The petitioner, who is the kuthaka holder of the right to collect fee from the artists for Chendamelam accompanying Pettathullal at Erumeli in terms of Ext.P1 e-tender notification dated 15.09.2022 issued by the 7^th respondent Devaswom Commissioner and on the strength of Ext.P2 contract dated 19.10.2022, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 3 and 5 to render adequate, effective and meaningful protection for the life and properties of the petitioner and his employees, in exercising their right to collect fee for Chendamelam, by virtue of Exts.P1 and P2, and for the peaceful conduct of Chendamelam accompanying the customary practice of Pettathullal.

¶36

On 04.11.2022, when this writ petition came up for admission, this Court admitted the matter on file. The learned Government Pleader took notice for respondents 1 to 5. The learned Standing Counsel took notice for respondents 6 to 9. This Court issued notice to respondents 10 and 11 by special

¶37

-4-

¶38

W.P.(C).No.35399 of 2022

¶39

messenger.

¶40

On 09.11.2022, when this writ petition came up for consideration, after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Senior Government Pleader, the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board and also

¶41

the learned counsel for respondents 10 and 11, the learned Single Judge of this Court passed an interim order, which reads thus;

¶42

“Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 6 to 9. Learned counsel for respondents 10 to 11 seeks time to place counter affidavit on record.

¶43

In the meanwhile, appropriate protection shall be granted to the petitioner to carry out the activities that they are permitted to do by the Devaswom officials.”

¶44

The said order was followed by the order dated

¶45

07.12.2022, which reads thus;

¶46

“Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel appearing for the Travancore Devaswom Board and the learned counsel appearing for respondents 10 and 11 as well as the learned Government Pleader.

¶47

In view of the contentions advanced, I am of the opinion

¶48

-5-

¶49

W.P.(C).No.35399 of 2022

¶50

that the interim order granted is liable to continue. In case of any overt acts by respondents 10 and 11 or anybody claiming through them, obstructing the collection of fees by the petitioner, the petitioner may inform the Station House Officer, who shall take appropriate steps in accordance with law. The police shall also take appropriate steps to see that law and order is maintained in the locality. All other issues are left open to be decided in appropriate proceedings.”

¶51

By the order dated 13.12.2022, the matter was referred before the Devaswom Bench. The said order reads thus:

¶52

“This writ petition is with regard to the right of the petitioner to collect fee from the persons providing Chendamelam accompanying the Pettathullal at Erumely. Since the observance of the Pettathullal at Erumely is a ceremonial exercise in connection with the Sabarimala pilgrimage and since there appears to be a dispute with regard to the same, I am of the opinion that the matter requires to be considered by the Division Bench hearing Devaswom matters.”

¶53

On 20.12.2022, after considering the materials on

¶54

record and also the rival contentions, this Court directed the 3^rd respondent District Police Chief and also the 5^th respondent

¶55

Station House Officer to ensure that there is no law and order issues in connection with Pettathullal at Erumeli, during

¶56

-6-

¶57

W.P.(C).No.35399 of 2022

¶58

Mandala-Makaravilakku festival season of 1198 ME (2022-23), either at the instance of respondents 10 and 11 and their supporters or even at the instance of the petitioner and his employees.

¶59

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Senior Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 5, the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board representing respondents 6 to 9 and also the learned counsel for respondents 10 and 11.

¶60

On 20.12.2022, during the course of arguments, the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board submitted that, Pettathullal starts from Petta Temple and ends at Valiyambalam in front of kodimaram, after rounding Shastha Temple. The Kuthaka right to collect fee for Chendamelam is being auctioned for the last several decades, during Mandala-Makaravilakku festival season, except the last two years due to Covid-19 pandemic.

¶61

The fact that Pettathullal is part of the rituals in the Temples in question, in connection with Sabarimala pilgrimage, is not disputed by respondents 10 and 11. In view

¶62

-7-

¶63

W.P.(C).No.35399 of 2022

¶64

of the provisions under Sections 15A and 31 of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, the Travancore Devaswom Board has a statutory duty to see that the regular traditional rites and ceremonies according to the practice prevalent in the temples in question are performed promptly and to arrange for the conduct of the daily worship and ceremonies and of the festivals in those temples, according to its usage.

¶65

In the order dated 20.12.2022, this Court noticed that large number of Sabarimala pilgrims used to participate in Erumeli Pettathullal. They avail the service of artists for Chendamelam. The right to collect fee from the artists for Chendamelam is being auctioned by the Travancore Devaswom Board during every pilgrimage season. When large number of pilgrims, including aged persons, persons with disability and also children of tender age gather at Erumeli in connection with their pilgrimage and participate in Pettathullal accompanied by the artists for Chendmelam, neither the petitioner and his employees nor respondents 10 and 11 and their supporters can create any law and order issues at

¶66

-8-

¶67

W.P.(C).No.35399 of 2022

¶68

Erumeli, during the pilgrimage season. Therefore, by the order dated 20.12.2022 the 3^rd respondent District Police Chief and also the 5^th respondent Station House Officer were directed to ensure that there is no law and order issues in connection with Pettathullal at Erumeli, during MandalaMakaravilakku festival season of 1198 M.E. (2022-23), either at the instance of respondents 10 and 11 and their supporters

¶69

or even at the instance of the petitioner and his employees.

¶70

Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned Senior Government Pleader, on instructions, would submit that there is no law and order issues, after the order of this Court dated 20.12.2022.

¶71

In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of in terms of the interim order of this Court dated 20.12.2022, which is made absolute.

¶72

Sd/-

¶73

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE

¶74

Sd/-

¶75

P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE

¶76

AV/9/1

¶77

-9-

¶78

W.P.(C).No.35399 of 2022

¶79

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 35399/2022

¶80

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶81

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE E-TENDER NO. ROC NO.
54/22/SAB DATED 15.09.2022.

¶82

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN
PETITIONER AND 9TH RESPONDENT DATED
19.10.2022.

¶83

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF PAYMENT TO
6TH RESPONDENT DATED 19.10.2022.

¶84

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATIONS
SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DATED 25.10.2022.

¶85

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE SCREEN SHOTS OF
SOCIAL MEDIA POST OF RESPONDENTS 10
AND 11 AND THEIR HENCHMEN DATED NIL

¶86

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATIONS
BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED
02.11.2022.

¶87

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS

¶88

Exhibit R10 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
SUBMITTED BY THE ALANGAD YOGAM DATED
25/2/2022

R.Jayarajan, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Jayarajan, v. State of Kerala

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

Aldrin T.F. Vs K.K.Joseph

Manoj A.K Vs Lini M.

Manoj a.K., Vs Lini M.

Shobha Prakash Vs O N Satheeshan

M.P.Sangeetha Vs Subhash P.

Ragesh Menon Vs Salini Sreedhar