Dismissed

Suo Motu v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Mar 2024DBP/96/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This suo motu DBP addressed a complaint regarding unsanitary conditions caused by banning and begging within the Vaikom Sree Mahadeva Temple premises. The court directed restoration of sanitation by preventing begging, lottery vending, and unauthorized parking fee collection.

What did the court decide?

4th and 5th respondents directed to prevent begging and lottery vending in the temple premises and to ensure no unauthorized collection of parking fees.

Suo Motu Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2024)

¶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 G. GIRISH

¶6

TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 15TH PHALGUNA, 1945

¶7

DBP NO.96 OF 2023

¶8

BEGGING IN VAIKOM TEMPLE - INACTION BY THE DEVASWOM

¶9

AUTHORITIES AND REQUEST NOT TO LEVY PARKING FEE IN THE

TEMPLE GROUND

PETITIONER:

SUO MOTU

RESPONDENTS:

¶14

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (DEVASWOM) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001

¶15

2 TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, DEVASWOM HEAD QUARTERS, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

¶16

3 THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, DEVASWOM HEAD QUARTERS, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003.

¶17

4 ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, VAIKOM GROUP, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686141

¶18

5 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, VAIKOM SREE MAHADEVA TEMPLE, VAZHAMANA ROAD, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686141

¶19

¶20

DBP No.96 of 2023

¶21

BY ADV SHRI.S.RAJMOHAN, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER ;
SHRI.G.SANTHOSH KUMAR, STANDING COUNSEL ;
SHRI.P.RAJEEVE, ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER

¶22

THIS DEVASWOM BOARD PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 05.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

DBP No.96 of 2023

O R D E R

Anil K. Narendran, J.

¶27

This DBP is registered suo motu , based on a complaint dated ‘Nil’ [File No.D1-4/113048/2022] received from one Somanathan Nair, wherein it is stated as follows ;

¶28

“ഭാർ്ᨮ വി എ്ᩐ സ ് തരീ ഭി്ᩌ ാടനം നട്ᩐ ത രുട്ങ ിയി്ᨾത 10 വർഷമായി. വവ്ക ം ര്ᩈ ിനതറെ വട്ഷ്ക ാപുര്ᩈ ിനു സ്മീപം കാണി്ക വ്ᨸ ി റവ്ച ിരി്കു്ᩐ ല്ᩈ ാണത. ഇവർ്ക ത നാലത ആൺമ്ക ളാണത ഉ്ᩦ രത. ഒരാൾ േേി മരി്ചു്ഷ പായി. പിറ്ᩐ 3 മ്ക ൾ. പസ ൻ, പകാശൻ, അ്ഷശാകൻ. അ്ഷശാകൻ കിണെത െിം ത പണി്ക ാരനാണത. പകാശനും ്പസ നും ചുമ്ᨾു റരാഴിലാളിയുമാണത. ഭി്ᩌ ാടനം, ക്ച വടം, ലാ്ᨾെി മുരലായവ നട്ᩈ രുറര്ᩐ ത വൈ്ഷ്ക ാടരി ഉ്ᩈ രവത ോർഡത റവ്ച ി്ᨾു്ᩦ രും ആണത. ഇരത പുരാവസ ് തരു ആ്ഷണാ. കാടരിയിറല ന്മ ർ OP No. 3821/1990.DBP No.49.OC 2015 Date 25.11.2015 ഉ്ᩈ രവത. ഇറരാ്ᩐു ം ഉ്ഷ് യാ ്ᩝ്ഷ രാ വസ്വം ജീവന്ക ാ്ഷരാ അെിയാ്ᩈ മ്ᨾിലാണത. ഭി്ᩌ ാടനം കി്ᨾു്ᩐ പണം മുഴുവനും വസ്വം റക്ᨾിട്ᩈ ിൽ കടമുെി വാടകയത്ക ത എടു്ᩈ അവൊ്ച റന ഏൽ്പ ി്കു ം. ഇവർ ഇ്ᨾിരു്ᩐ സ്വർണം മുഴുവനും ഇളയ മകനായ അ്ഷശാകറെ മകളുറട കലയാണ്ᩈ ിനത റകാടു്ᩈു . പിറ്ᩐ 50,000/- രൂപ മൂ്ᩐ ത മാസ ിനത മു്മ ത റകാടു . പകാശനതറെ മകറെ ഭാരയയത്ക ത 40,000/രൂപ ോ്ഝ ിൽ നി്ᩐ ത എടു്ᩈു റകാടു്കു കയും റചയതരാണത ് . പകാശൻ രാവിറല വ്ᩐ ത ഒരു വീരം വ്ᩂ മടി്ചു റകാ്ᩂു്ഷ പാകും. മ്ക ൾ്ക ത അ്മ റയ വ്ᩂ . പണം മാ്രം മരി. കാണി്ക ഇടാൻ വരു്ᩐ വർ ഇടാറര ഈ ഭാർ്ᨮ വിയത്ക ത റകാടു്ᩈ ി്ᨾത പാവുകയും റച്യു്ᩐ രത നരിൽ വ്ᩐ ാൽ കാണാം ഇരത സ്രയം ആ്ഷണാ എ്ᩐ ത. ഇവർ ഭ്ᩌ ണം കഴി്ച ത വക കഴുകു്ᩐ രും ാപുരനടയിലാണത. ഭാർ്ᨮ വി കിട്കു്ᩐ രും ഉെ്ങു്ᩐ രും വസ്വം ോർഡത റക്ᨾിട്ᩈ ിറെ വരാ്ᩌ യിലാണത. രാ്രിയായാൽ മലമൂ്രവിസ്ർ്ᨸ നം റച്യു്ᩐ രും അ്മ ലപരിസ്ര്ᩈ ാണത. ോ്ഝ ിറെ പാസ്തേു്ക ത അവൊ്ച നതറെ ക്യ ിലാണത. വിശ്മായ വിവരം അെിയുവാൻ അവൊ്ച റന സ്മീപി്കു ക. ത 2. വവ്ക ം ര്ᩈ ിനു സ്മീപം വാൈനം പാർ്ക ത റച്യു വാൻ ് ൗ്ᩂ ഉ്ᩂ . ത വാൈനം ൗ്ᩂ ിൽ കയ്റി ഫീസ്ത ്ഷ മടി്ക ാെു്ᩂ ത. വറെ അ്മ ല്ങ ളിലും ഒരിട്ᩈു ം ഫീസ്ത മടി്ക ാെി്ᩤ . ഏ്റു മാനൂർ, രുെവൂർ,

¶29

¶30

DBP No.96 of 2023

¶31

ചാ്റാനി്ക ര ഇവിറടറയാ്ᩐു ം ഫീസ്ത മടി്ക ാെി്ᩤ്ഷ്ᩤ ാ. ഫീസ്ത ഇവിറടയും ഒഴിവാ്ക ി ഭ്വ ജന്ങ റള സ്ൈായി്ക ണറമ്ᩐ അ്ഷപ്ᩌ ി്കു്ᩐു .”

¶32

In the report dated 04.09.2023 of the Tahsildar,

¶33

Vaikom Taluk, addressed to Registrar (District Judiciary), it is stated that reports were called for from the Village Officer, Vaikom and Assistant Devaswom Commissioner (Vaikom Group)

¶34

in respect of the complaint made by the complainant. As per the report submitted by the Village Officer, Vaikom, a woman named

¶35

Bhargavi, aged 89 years, begs on the temple premises and sleeps on the veranda of the Devaswom building situated near the North Gopuram of Vaikom Sree Mahadeva Temple. She has three sons. She had been living with her youngest son. One Avarachan, who runs a shop in the Devaswom building situated on the north side of the temple, helps her only on compassion. Regarding the levy of parking fee at the parking ground of Vaikom Sree Mahadeva Temple near the west side entrance, the Assistant Devaswom Commissioner, Vaikom reported that it is levied by the Temple Advisory Committee, without any sanction

¶36

for the same from the Travancore Devaswom Board. Temple Advisory Committee reported that the parking fee is levied to meet the expenditures in connection with the functioning of fresh-up centre-cum-toilet complex established in the parking

¶37

¶38

DBP No.96 of 2023

¶39

ground, as per the orders of this Court, which is under the supervision of the Temple Advisory Committee. As per the report of the Assistant Devaswom Commissioner, the Committee has not obtained permission for the same.

¶40

On 03.10.2023, when this matter came up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board sought time to get instructions.

¶41

On 09.10.2023, when this matter came up for consideration along with the connected matters, the learned Advocate Commissioner sought time to file a report in this DBP.

¶42

The learned Advocate Commissioner has filed a report

¶43

dated 13.10.2023. Paragraph No.8 of that report reads thus;

¶44

“It is further submitted that the Complainant/Petitioner in D.B.P. No.96/2023 is one Somanathan Nair who is also a lottery vendor, vending lotteries inside and precincts of the temple and his allegation of begging by the old lady named Smt. Bhargavy, aged 89 is true and correct. She is sitting in front of the North Gopuram in a chair and begging therein. She is survived by 3 sons but she sleeps in the Varantha of Devaswom shop building situated near the Northern Gopuram of Temple. To my information, the old lady is maintaining a Bank Account in Dhanalakshmi Bank, Vaikom Branch and she is even lending money to certain persons with the help of some individuals including Sri. Avarachan. Hence, the involvement of Sri. Avarachan who is running a shop in the Devaswom building is highly

¶45

¶46

DBP No.96 of 2023

¶47

suspicious because the entire help including counting of money is done by Sri. Avarachan.”

¶48

Heard the learned Senior Government Pleader for the

¶49

1^st respondent, the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board for respondents 2 to 5 and also the learned Advocate Commissioner.

¶50

Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950 enacted by the State Legislature makes provision for the administration, supervision and control of incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms and of other Hindu Religious Endowments and Funds. As per sub-section (3) of Section 1 of the Act, substituted by the Kerala Adaptation of Laws Order, 1956, P art I of the Act shall extend to Travancore, Part II of the Act shall extend to Cochin and Part III of the Act shall extend to the whole of the State of Kerala, excluding the Malabar District.

¶51

Chapter II of the Act deals with the Travancore Devaswom. Section 3 of the Act deals with vesting of administration in Board. Section 4 of the Act deals with constitution of the Travancore Devaswom Board. As per subsection (2) of Section 4, the Board shall be a body corporate having perpetual succession and a common seal with power to hold and acquire properties for and on behalf of the incorporated

¶52

¶53

DBP No.96 of 2023

¶54

and unincorporated Devaswoms and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments under the management of the Board.

¶55

Section 15 of the Act deals with vesting of jurisdiction in the Board. As per sub-section (1) of Section 15, subject to the provisions of Chapter III of Part I, all rights, authority and jurisdiction belonging to or exercised by the Ruler of Travancore prior to the first day of July, 1949, in respect of Devaswoms and Hindu Religious Endowments shall vest in and be exercised by the Board in accordance with the provisions of this Act. As per sub-section (2) of Section 15, the Board shall exercise all powers of direction, control and supervision over the incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms and Hindu Religious Endowments under their jurisdiction.

¶56

As per Section 15A of the Act, it shall be the duty of the Board to perform the following functions, namely, (i) to see that the regular traditional rites and ceremonies according to the practice prevalent in the religious institutions are performed promptly; (ii) to monitor whether the administrative officials and employees and also the employees connected with religious rites are functioning properly; (iii) to ensure proper maintenance and upliftment of the Hindu religious institutions; (iv) to establish and maintain proper facilities in the temples for the devotees.

¶57

¶58

DBP No.96 of 2023

¶59

As per Section 31 of the Act, subject to the provisions of Part I and the rules made thereunder, the Board shall manage the properties and affairs of the Devaswoms, both incorporated, and unincorporated as heretofore, and arrange for the conduct of the daily worship and ceremonies and of the festivals in every temple according to its usage.

¶60

In view of the statutory provisions referred to hereinabove, it is for the Travancore Devaswom Board to take necessary steps to ensure that there is proper facilities for the devotees to exercise their right to worship, in an appropriate manner, according to the customary and religious practices followed in the temple.

¶61

As per the report dated 13.10.2023 filed by the learned Advocate Commissioner, the complainant in the complaint dated nil, namely, Somanathan Nair, is a lottery vendor, vending lotteries inside and precincts of the temple.

¶62

Having considered the submissions made by the learned Senior Government Pleader, the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board and the learned Advocate Commissioner, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this DBP by directing the 4^th respondent Assistant Devaswom Commissioner and the 5^th respondent Devaswom Officer, Vaikom Sree

¶63

¶64

DBP No.96 of 2023

¶65

Mahadeva Temple to take necessary steps to prevent begging and lottery vending inside the temple premises Vaikom Sree Mahadeva Temple and also near the temple gopurams, causing

¶66

inconvenience to the devotees. They shall also ensure there is no unauthorised collection of parking fees in the parking ground of Vaikom Sree Mahadeva Temple.

¶67

Sd/- ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE

¶68

Sd/-

¶69

G. GIRISH, JUDGE

¶70

vgd

Suo Motu v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suo Motu 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

Rajendran.K.B Vs State of Kerala

Koonamavu St.Philomina’S Sadhu Jana Sanghom No. 145 Vs Travancore Devaswom Board - Tdb

Eripuram Sreekrishna Temple Vs State of Kerala

Suo Motu Vs State of Kerala

V.K.Jayaprakash Vs Adv.K.B.Mohandas

Rajeev Thomas Vs M.J.Philip