Dismissed

Anoop S. Ayyappan v. the Travancore Devaswom Board

Kerala HC20 Feb 2023WP(C)/5718/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition sought restoration of the ritual 'Nayattuvili' for 2023 based on allegations that a Samithi prevented the petitioner from performing it in 2022. The Court dismissed the petition holding that the complaining Samithi was a necessary party and should have been impleaded, rendering the petition non-maintainable under Article 226 due to non-joinder.

What did the court decide?

None; the writ petition was dismissed due to non-joinder of a necessary party.

Anoop S. Ayyappan Vs the Travancore Devaswom Board — Service and Employment | 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

MONDAY, THE 20^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 1ST PHALGUNA, 1944

¶7

WP(C) NO. 5718 OF 2023

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

1 ANOOP S. AYYAPPAN, AGED 39 YEARS S/O LATE T.G. AYYAPPAN PILLAI, SUJA BHAVAN ERUMELY, ERUMELY P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KERALA., PIN - 686509

¶10

2 ABHIMANYU S. AYYAPPAN, AGED 35 YEARS S/O LATE T.G. AYYAPPAN PILLAI, SUJA BHAVAN ERUMELY, ERUMELY P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KERALA ., PIN - 686509 BY ADV SIJO PATHAPARAMBIL JOSEPH

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

1 THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEVASWOM HEADQUARTERS NANDANCODE. KAWDIAR POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 695003

¶13

2 THE SECRETARY THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, DEVASWOM HEADQUARTERS NANDANCODE, KAWDIAR POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695003

¶14

3 THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, DEVASWOM HEADQUARTERS NANDANCODE, KAWDIAR POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695003

¶15

4 THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER ERUMELY SREE DHARMASASTHA TEMPLE, ERUMELY P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN – 686509 SRI.G.BIJU, SC FOR TDB

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.02.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

¶18

WP(C) No.5718 of 2023

¶19

J U D G M E N T

¶20

Anil K.Narendran, J.

¶21

The petitioners have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking an order directing the 3^rd respondent Devaswom Commissioner to pass orders on Ext.P5 representation dated 31.01.2023 made by them seeking permission to perform the ritual of Nayattuvili during the annual festival of Erumely Sree Dharmasastha Temple, for the year 2023, which is a temple under the management of the 1^st respondent Travancore Devaswom Board.

¶22

In the writ petition, it is alleged that, the 1^st petitioner was refrained from performing the ritual Nayattuvili in the annual festival of Erumely Sree Dharmasastha Temple, for the year 2022, based on a complaint made by an organisation, i.e., ‘Sree Sabareesha Seva Samithi’. The 1^st petitioner obtained a copy of the complaint dated 13.02.2022 made by the President of Sree Sabareesha Seva Samithi, under the Right to Information Act, 2005, which is enclosed along with Ext.P4 reply dated 09.04.2022 obtained under the provisions of the said Act. In the synopsis of this writ petition, it is stated that, based on a complaint preferred

¶23

¶24

WP(C) No.5718 of 2023

¶25

by a paper organisation, as evidenced by Ext.P4 reply under the Right to Information Act, the petitioners are refrained from performing Nayattuvili in Erumely Sree Dharmasastha Temple.

¶26

Sree Sabareesha Seva Samithi, which made a complaint dated 13.02.2022 against the petitioners, is not made a party to this writ petition, though the statement of facts and synopsis of the writ petition contains specific allegations against that Samithi.

¶27

Rule 148 of the Rules of the High Court of Kerala, 1971, deals with addition of parties. As per Rule 148, all persons directly affected shall be made parties to the petition. Where such persons are numerous, one or more of them may, with the permission of the Court on application made for the purpose, be impleaded on behalf of or for the benefit of all persons so affected; but notice of the original petition shall, on admission, be given to all such persons either by personal service or by public advertisement as the Court in each case may direct.

¶28

When the writ petition contains allegations against Sree Sabareesha Seva Samithi, the petitioners ought to have impleaded the said Samithi as a respondent in this writ petition, so as to

¶29

¶30

WP(C) No.5718 of 2023

¶31

enable them to answer those allegations. The averments in the writ petition are to the effect that it is based on the complaint made by Sree Sabareesha Seva Samithi that the petitioners are refrained from performing Nayattuvili in the annual festival of Erumely Sree Dharmasastha Temple. Therefore, the petitioners cannot maintain this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, without the said Samithi in the party array.

¶32

In the result, this writ petition is dismissed on the ground of non-joinder of necessary party; however, without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to file a fresh writ petition with proper pleadings and necessary parties in the party array.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

ANIL K.NARENDRAN JUDGE

Sd/-

P.G.AJITHKUMAR

JUDGE

WP(C) No.5718 of 2023

¶40

¶41

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5718/2023

¶42

PETITION	ER EXHIBI	TS
Exhibit	P1	A TRUE EXTRACT NAYATTU AYYAPPA	COPY DAT VILI N PI	OF THE ED 08.03 PERFORM LLAI	MANGALAM NEWS PAPER .2020, FEATURING THE ANCE OF LATE MR. T.G.
Exhibit	P2	A TRUE PAGE OF 31.07.2 T.G. AY	COPY MAT 021, YAPP	OF THE HRUBHUMI REPORTI AN PILLA	EXTRACT OF OBITUARY E-NEWS PAPER DATED NG THE DEATH OF MR. I
Exhibit	P3 (a)	A TRUE BROCHUR	COPY E OF	OF THE ERUMELY	ANNUAL FESTIVAL SREE DHARMASASTHA
		TEMPLE	FOR	THE YEAR	2011 DATED NIL
Exhibit	P3 (b)	A TRUE BROCHUR	COPY E OF	OF THE ERUMELY	ANNUAL FESTIVAL SREE DHARMASASTHA
		TEMPLE	FOR	THE YEAR	2013 DATED NIL
Exhibit	P3 (c)	A TRUE BROCHUR TEMPLE	COPY E OF FOR	OF THE ERUMELY THE YEAR	ANNUAL FESTIVAL SREE DHARMASASTHA 2016 DATED NIL
Exhibit	P3 (d)	A TRUE BROCHUR TEMPLE	COPY E OF FOR	OF THE ERUMELY THE YEAR	ANNUAL FESTIVAL SREE DHARMASASTHA 2017 DATED NIL
Exhibit	P4	A TRUE RIGHT T RESPOND	COPY O IN ENT	OF THE FORMATIO DATED 09	REPLY GIVEN UNDER THE N ACT, 2005 BY THE 4TH .04.2022
Exhibit	P5	A TRUE 31.01.2 TO THE	COPY 023 3RD	OF THE PREFERRE RESPONDE	REPRESENTATION DATED D BY THE PETITIONERS NT
Exhibit	P6	A TRUE INDIA P P5 REPR PETITIO	COPY OST ESEN NERS	OF THE DATED 03 TATION P	POSTAL SLIP ISSUED BY .02.2023 FOR EXHIBIT REFERRED BY THE

Anoop S. Ayyappan v. the Travancore Devaswom Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anoop S. Ayyappan v. the Travancore Devaswom Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Binu Vs Travancore Devaswom Board

Rajalekshmi P Vs State of Kerala

Raheez Nizar Vs Fathima Iqbal

Muhammed Yasir Vs Dr.Faheema Hassan

Hazeena Vs Faizaludheen

Sareena Vs Haseena S