Kerala High Court
Lakshmi vs Malabar Devaswom Board on 23 May, 2024
Author: Anil K. Narendran
Bench: Anil K. Narendran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K. NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISANKAR V. MENON
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2024 / 2ND JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C)NO.13947 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
LAKSHMI
AGED 22 YEARS
LAKSHMI, D/O. ANOOP, "LAKSHMISREE", MLA ROAD,
KOVOOR, UMMALATHOOR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN -
673008
BY ADVS.
SANTHEEP ANKARATH
P.ANIRUDHAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HOUSEFED COMPLEX,
ERANHIPALAM P.O., KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673006
2 THE COMMISSIONER
MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, HOUSEFED COMPLEX,
ERANHIPALAM P.O., KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673006
3 SENIOR DEPUTY DIRECTOR
KERALA STATE AUDIT DEPARTMENT, MALABAR DEVASWOM
AUDIT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE, PIN -
673020
4 MANOJ KUMAR. B
"NIRMAL", P.O. VALLIKKUNNU NORTH, KADALUNDI
NAGARAM, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673314
5 ADDL. R5. ZAMORIN RAJA OF CALICUT,
(TRUSTEE, ALATHIYUR PERUMTHRIKOVIL AND THALI
MAHAKSHETHRAM), VALAYANAD, P.O. KOMMERI, CALICUT
2
W.P.(C)No.13947 of 2024
-673007.
6 ADDL. R6. EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
ALATHIYUR PERUMTHRIKOVIL, POYILISSERI P.O.,
TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676102.
7 ADDL. R7. EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
THALI MAHAKSHETHRAM, CHALAPPURAM, KOZHIKODE
DISTRICT, PIN-673002
*ADDL. R5 TO R7 IMPLEADED AS PER THE ORDER DATED
08.04.2024 IN I.A.NO.1/2024.
BY ADVS.
K.MOHANAKANNAN FOR R4
D.S.THUSHARA(K/76/2010)
A.C.VENUGOPAL FOR R5
VIDHYA. A.C(K/332/2003)
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI. LAKSHMI NARAYANAN, SR. COUNSEL;
SRI. S. RAJMOHAN, SR. GP;
SMT. RANJANIE R, SC, MDB
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 23.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
3
W.P.(C)No.13947 of 2024
JUDGMENT
Anil K. Narendran, J.
The petitioner is a devotee of Lord Sreerama and Hanuman
of Alathiyur Perumthrikovil. The said temple and Tali Mahadeva
Temple are controlled institutions under the Malabar Devaswom
Board. The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226
of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus
commanding the 2nd respondent Commissioner, Malabar
Devaswom Board to take up Ext.P3 representation dated
11.03.2024 made by the petitioner, concerning Ext.P1 audit
objections dated 17.12.2020, relating to the audit of Tali
Mahadeva Temple, and Ext.P2 audit report dated 22.09.2022 of
Sree Alathiyur Perumthrikovil, and to conduct an enquiry against
the 4th respondent, who is now holding the post of Executive
Officer of Tali Mahadeva Temple, within a time limit to be fixed by
this Court.
2. On 08.04.2024, when this writ petition came up for
consideration, by the order in I.A.No.1 of 2024, the hereditary
trustee and also the Executive Officers of the temples were
impleaded as additional respondents 5 to 7. The learned Standing
Counsel for Malabar Devaswom Board took notice on admission
for respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Senior Government
Pleader for the 3rd respondent. Urgent notice on admission by
speed post was ordered to 4th respondent and also to additional
respondents 5 to 7, returnable within four weeks.
3. In the writ petition, it is alleged that the 4th respondent
while officiating as Executive Officer of two temples under the
Malabar Devaswom Board committed grave and serious financial
mismanagement and misappropriation. He had not submitted
accounts of the two Devaswoms for audit, for years together.
Finally, accounts of the temples were audited for four years
together, starting from 2018 to 2021, in the year 2022. In the
audit objections grave irregularities and misappropriation of funds
have been noticed by the State Audit. The audit objections were
also brought to the notice of the authorities under the Malabar
Devaswom Board. In spite of the same, no action was being
initiated against the 4th respondent. The petitioner submitted
Ext.P3 representation dated 11.03.2024 before the 2nd respondent
Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board. Feeling aggrieved by
the inaction on the part of the 2nd respondent, the petitioner is
before this Court in this writ petition seeking the aforesaid reliefs.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the
learned Standing Counsel for Malabar Devaswom Board for
respondents 1 and 2, the learned Senior Government Pleader for
the 3rd respondent Senior Deputy Director, Malabar Devaswom
Board Audit and the respective counsel for the 4th respondent and
additional respondents 5 to 7.
5. In A.A. Gopalakrishnan v. Cochin Devaswom
Board [(2007) 7 SCC 482] a Three-Judge Bench of the Apex
Court held that the properties of deities, temples and Devaswom
Boards, require to be protected and safeguarded by their
trustees/archakas/shebaits/employees. Instances are many
where persons entrusted with the duty of managing and
safeguarding the properties of temples, deities and Devaswom
Boards have usurped and misappropriated such properties by
setting up false claims of ownership or tenancy, or adverse
possession. This is possible only with the passive or active
collusion of the authorities concerned. Such acts of 'fence eating
the crops' should be dealt with sternly. The Government, members
or trustees of boards/trusts, and devotees should be vigilant to
prevent any such usurpation or encroachment. It is also the duty
of courts to protect and safeguard the properties of religious and
charitable institutions from wrongful claims or misappropriation.
6. In Travancore Devaswom Board v. Mohanan Nair
[(2013) 3 KLT 132] a Division Bench of this Court noticed that
in A.A. Gopalakrishnan [(2007) 7 SCC 482] a Three-Judge
Bench of the Apex Court emphasised that it is the duty of the
courts to protect and safeguard the interest and properties of the
religious and charitable institutions. The Division Bench further
noticed that the relevant principles under the Hindu law will show
that the deity is always treated similar to that of a minor and there
are some points of similarity between a minor and a Hindu idol.
The High Court is the guardian of the deity and apart from the
revisional jurisdiction under Section 103 of the Kerala Land
Reforms Act, 1963, the High Court has inherent jurisdiction and
the doctrine of parens patriae will also apply in exercising the
jurisdiction.
7. Alathiyur Perumthrikovil and Tali Mahadeva Temple are
controlled institutions under the Malabar Devaswom Board. As
held in the decisions referred to supra, it is the duty of the trustees,
hereditary trustees and non-hereditary trustees to be faithful to
the Devaswom and manage, protect and safeguard the interest
and properties of the Devaswom, with reasonable diligence. The
Malabar Devaswom Board and its officials are duty-bound to
exercise their supervisory control in order to ensure that the
interests and properties of the Devaswom are protected and
safeguarded by its trustees and the employees of the Devaswom.
Any act of 'fence eating the crops' has to be dealt with sternly.
8. Having considered the submissions made at the Bar, we
deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition, without going
into the merits of the rival contentions, by directing the 2nd
respondent Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board to consider
and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3 representation dated
11.03.2024 made by the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible,
at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt
of a certified copy of this judgment, with notice to the petitioner,
the 4th respondent and also additional respondents 5 to 7.
Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE
Sd/-
HARISANKAR V. MENON, JUDGE
MIN
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13947/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P 1 TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION DATED 17.12.2020
CONCERNING THE AUDIT OF THALI
MAHASKSHETHRAM.
EXHIBIT P 2 TRUE COPY OF THE AUDIT REPORT OF SREE
ALATHIYUR PERUMTHRIKOVIL DATED 22.9.2022
FOR THE YEARS 2018-2021.
EXHIBIT P 3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED
BY THE PETITIONER DATED 11.3.2024 BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT
