K R Mahadevan vs Mattannur Muncipalty
2023 Latest Caselaw 10735 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
   THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 27TH ASWINA, 1945
                       WP(C) NO. 34626 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

          K.R.MAHADEVAN
          AGED 54 YEARS
          S/O.K.M.RAMAMURTHY, "HAINDHAVEEYAM", MRA -61 A1/2,
          GREEN MEADOWS, 1ST STREET, MANAKKAPARAMBU ROAD,
          PONEKKARA, EDAPPALLY, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682024
          BY ADVS.
          C.RAJENDRAN
          R.S.SREEVIDYA
          B.K.GOPALAKRISHNAN
          MANU M.


RESPONDENTS:

    1     MATTANNUR MUNCIPALTY
          MATTANNUR MUNCIPALTY, MATTANNUR-MARUTHAYI-IRIKKOOR RD,
          MATTANNUR, KERALA,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
          PIN - 670702
    2     THE LIBRARY COMMITTEE
          MATTANNUR NAGARASABHA, NEAR MUNICIPALITY ROAD
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 670702
    3     THE HEAD MASTER
          THE HEAD MASTER, MATTANUR MADHUSOODANAN THANGAL
          SMARAKA UP SCHOOL, INDIRA NAGAR, MATTANNUR, KANNUR,
          PIN - 670702
     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
19.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 34626 OF 2023              2


                                                               CR
                               JUDGMENT

The Mattannur Municipality has proposed a 'Vidyarambham'

function, to be conducted in their library and has published Ext.P1

application form, to be filled up by the parents of children who are

interested in participating.

2. The petitioner, who is stated to be a person professing Hindu

religion, alleges that the format of Ext.P1 is designed to humiliate

certain sections of people, since it is limpid therefrom that children

will be forced to recite and write the prayers enumerated therein, at

the time of "Vidyarambham", contrary to their religious beliefs and

the ethos of 'Sanadhana Dharma'. The petitioner, therefore, prays

that respondents 1 and 2 be immediately interdicted from conducting

any such programme, which he asserts can only be done in a solemn

manner, in tune with traditional rituals.

3. In response to the afore submissions of the petitioner, as

made by his learned counsel - Sri.C.Rajendran, the learned Standing

Counsel for respondents 1 and 2 - Sri.Anoop P.V., submitted that the

petitioner appears to have approached this Court under a

misdirection of what is intended through Ext.P1. He explained that,

the Municipality has been organizing such event as early from the

year 2014, giving opportunity to members of every community, belief

and philosophy, to participate in a secular manner; for which,

multiple options of prayers have been shown in Ext.P1. He submitted

that it is the choice of the parents of the participating children to

decide which prayer, among the first three shown in Ext.P1, his or

her child will write, as their first words, during the 'Vidyarambham'

programme; and hence that, contrary to the assertions of the

petitioner, Ext.P1 discloses a very bonafide intent. He reiteratingly

submitted that the options given in Ext.P1 are intended to be chosen

by the parents of the children interested in participating in the

programme; and that no specific prayer will be forced to be recited or

written by any child, in derogation of their religious belief or

philosophy. He then asserted that this writ petition is not

maintainable because, the petitioner does not expouse any personal

cause, but appears to have approached this Court with confutative

intentions.

4. I have examined Ext.P1 and, as rightly pointed out by the

learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 2, it is an application

for a 'Vidyarambham' programmme organized by the 2 nd respondent

- Council of the Library, owned by the 1 st respondent - Municipality.

For clarity and ease of reading, Ext.P1 is extracted as under:

5. Apodictically, Ext.P1 does not profess the event to be a

religious function, but a 'Vidyarambham' - which semantically means

'commencement of education or knowledge'. There is nothing to

imply therefrom that it is proposed to be conducted in a particular

fashion, or in a particular manner; but solely that the parents can

apply for their children to be initiated into education through certain

prayers - the options of which have been indicated therein.

6. Surely, going by the affirmative submissions made on behalf

of respondents 1 and 2, it are the parents of the parents of children

who will choose the prayer to be initiated to their children; and there

cannot be any compulsion in this regard whatsoever. The unequivocal

undertaking of respondents 1 and 2 - made by their learned Standing

Counsel, that the choice of prayer of the parents - from among the

first three shown in Ext.P1 - will be final; and that the child will recite

and write only that as part of the programme, is hereby recorded.

7. Nevertheless, it is necessary to be clarified at this juncture,

that the choice to participate in the programme as mentioned in

Ext.P1 is with the individual parents and there can be no warrant for

them, or their child, to be compelled to do what they do not want to

do. When a parent takes the child to the programme of this nature,

which cannot be construed to be religious in its tenor - it being not

conducted in any religious place, but in a library, the repository of

words, in a manner of speaking - he or she expects it to be for

initiation of knowledge and nothing else. Any attempt by anyone,

much less respondents 1 and 2, to colour this with any other shade,

by forcing or inducing children to write or recite any prayer contrary

to their parent's choice would, therefore, be anathema to free

thought and freedom of belief. As long as the programme is

conducted with a secular thought, without breach of any law and with

full volition of the participants, I do not think this Court needs to

intervene in any manner whatsoever.

8. India is a land of religion pluralism - it is what defines us. It

takes into its fold varied philosophies, beliefs and ethos with ease;

and it has been so for the past several centuries. The event

mentioned in Ext.P1, must be conducted by respondents 1 and 2

implicitly respecting this, as also the individual choices to be made by

the parents. I caution that any action on their part to cause a tear on

the constitutional fabric - ingrained with liberty to all its citizens of

thought, expression, belief, faith and worship - can never be

countenanced.

9. To summate, though I see no reason to issue any further

orders in this writ petition; I record the submissions made on behalf

of respondents 1 and 2, that there will be no compulsion on any

parent of the child to either participate in the programme; or to

recite or write any prayer contrary to their beliefs. I also make it

abundantly clear that every parent who wants his/her child to

participate in the programme will have full choice, either to have

their child recite and write any one among the prayers mentioned in

Ext.P1, or any other of their belief; and this should be ensured to be

complied with by the 2nd respondent, which is stated to be organizing

the programme.

This writ petition is thus disposed of.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE MC/19.10

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 34626/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE INVITING APPLICATION ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT