Kerala High Court
Chandrasekharan Nair vs Srisankar on 25 September, 2024
Author: Anil K. Narendran
Bench: Anil K. Narendran
1
Cont.Case (C)No.1094 of 2024
2024:KER:71629
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K. NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 3RD ASWINA, 1946
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1094 OF 2024
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.09.2023 IN WP(C) NO.25175 OF
2023 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN THE WRIT PETITION:
CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR
AGED 57 YEARS
PANACKAL HOUSE, THANNEERMUKKAM P.O., CHERTHALA,
ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688527
BY ADVS.R.KRISHNA RAJ
R.PRATHEESH (ARANMULA)
E.S.SONI
SREERAJA V.
RESPONDENTS/3RD AND 4TH RESPONDENTS IN THE WRIT PETITION:
1 SRISANKAR, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM
BOARD, AMBALAPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688561
2 SAJEEV P., AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, S/O. NOT
KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, SUB GROUP OFFICER, TRAVANCORE
DEVASWOM BOARD CHALI NARAYANAPURAM DEVASWOM CHERTHALA,
ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688527
R BY SC TDB - SRI. G. SANTHOSH KUMAR
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 25.09.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2
Cont.Case (C)No.1094 of 2024
2024:KER:71629
JUDGMENT
Anil K. Narendran, J.
The petitioner has filed this contempt case alleging wilful
disobedience of the directions contained in the judgment of this
Court dated 19.09.2023 in W.P.(C)No.25175 of 2023, whereby
that writ petition was disposed of with the directions contained
therein at paragraph 22. Paragraphs 21, 22 and also the last
paragraph of the judgment read thus;
"21. The learned Standing Counsel for Travancore
Devaswom Board, on instructions, would submit that after
Ext.P7 order dated 31.03.2023 of the 2nd respondent
Devaswom Commissioner, the entire activities in the
temple are managed by the 4th respondent Sub Group
Officer.
22. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is
disposed of by treating Ext.P7 order dated 31.03.2023 of
the 2nd respondent Devaswom Commissioner as a show
cause notice to the Temple Advisory Committee to offer
their explanation on the action proposed under Clause (12)
of the Rules to remove the Committee for the reasons
stated therein, since the said order is one issued in
violation of the principles of natural justice, without
serving a copy of report No.554 dated 15.03.2023 of the
3rd respondent Assistant Devaswom Commissioner (Ref.
No.3 in Ext.P7 order dated 31.03.2023). The 2 nd
respondent is directed to reconsider the matter, after
serving the petitioner a copy of report No.554 dated
2024:KER:71629
15.03.2023 of the 3rd respondent Assistant Devaswom
Commissioner (Ref.No.3 in Ext.P7 order dated
31.03.2023), which shall be served within a period of two
weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this
judgment. Thereafter, the petitioner shall submit the
explanation of the Committee before the 2nd respondent,
within a further period of three weeks. After considering
the said explanation, the 2nd respondent shall take an
appropriate decision in the matter, after affording the
petitioner and other members of the Committee an
opportunity of being heard, and after taking note of the
legal and factual contentions raised before him and the law
laid down in the decisions on the point, as expeditiously as
possible, at any rate, within a further period of one month.
The decision, if any, taken by the Travancore Devaswom
Board to reconstitute the Temple Advisory Committee of
Sree Chali Narayanapuram Maha Kshethram shall be kept
in abeyance till such time and the entire activities in the
temple shall continue to be managed directly by the 4 th
respondent Sub Group Officer."
2. On 21.06.2024, when this contempt case came up for
consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought time
to substitute the memo of charges produced along with the
contempt case, since it was not properly worded. Thereafter, by
the order dated 10.09.2024 in I.A.No.1 of 2024, the memo of
charges in the contempt case was substituted with that produced
along with the said interlocutory application.
2024:KER:71629
3. Respondents 1 and 2 have filed individual affidavits
dated 09.09.2024, explaining the facts and circumstances. In
paragraph 5 of those affidavits, it is stated that Bhagavatha
Sapthahayajnam was held from 16.12.2023 to 23.12.2023 in a
smooth manner, without any sort of complaints. The
Sapthahayajnam was conducted under the leadership of the
Assistant Devaswom Commissioner and the Sub Group Officer,
and a co-ordination group was formed from among certain
sponsors for providing necessary assistance to the Sub Group
Officer for conducting Sapthahayajnam, which was conducted
without any collection of funds from the public and solely upon
sponsorship.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
5. In Annexure A2 notice dated 15.12.2023 issued in
respect of the Bhagavatha Sapthahayajnam, the name of
Sapthaha Samithi Kootaima, Thaneermukkam is also printed on
the front page, at a prominent place. When the temple in
question, i.e., Sree Chali Narayanapuram Mahakshethram is a
temple under the management of the Travancore Devaswom
Board, in the absence of a Temple Advisory Committee
2024:KER:71629
constituted under Section 31A of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu
Religious Institutions Act, 1950, the entire activities in the
temple including the conduct of Bhagavatha Sapthahayajnam
should have been conducted departmentally, without the
involvement of an organisation like Sapthaha Samithi Kootaima.
Such organisations cannot have any activity whatsoever in the
conduct of any ritual or ceremony in Sree Chali Narayanapuram
Mahakshethram. Therefore, the conduct of the respondents
permitting such an organisation to be involved in the activities in
the temple in connection with the conduct of Bhagavatha
Sapthahayajnam has to be deprecated in the strongest words.
6. Pursuant to the directions contained in the judgment
dated 19.09.2023 in W.P.(C)No.25175 of 2023, the Devaswom
Commissioner has already passed Annexure R2(a) order dated
11.01.2024, whereby interference was declined in the order
dated 31.03.2023 [Ext.P7 in W.P.(C)No.25175 of 2023].
7. In such circumstances, this contempt case is closed
without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge
Annexure R2(a) order dated 11.01.2024 of the Devaswom
Commissioner in appropriate proceedings; however, after
deprecating in the strongest words the conduct of the
2024:KER:71629
respondents in permitting Sapthaha Samithi Kootaima,
Thaneermukkam to involve in the activities in Sree Chali
Narayanapuram Mahakshethram, in connection with the conduct
of Bhagavatha Sapthahayajnam.
Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE
Sd/-
SOPHY THOMAS, JUDGE
AV/30/9
2024:KER:71629
APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1094/2024
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A-1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS
HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.(C).NO.25175/2023 DATED
19.09.2023
ANNEXURE A- 2 TRUE COPY OF THE SAPTHAHAM NOTICE DATED
15.12.2023
RESPONDENT ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE-R1(A) TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. ROC.1757/20/NS-2
DATED 11/01/2024 ISSUED BY THE DEVASWOM
COMMISSIONER.
ANNEXURE-R1(B) TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.ROC.1757/20/NS.2 DATED
07/02/2024 ISSUED BY THE DEVASWOM
COMMISSIONER.
ANNEXURE-R2(A) TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. ROC.1757/20/NS-2
DATED 11/01/2024 ISSUED BY THE DEVASWOM
COMMISSIONER.
ANNEXURE-R2(B) TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.ROC.1757/20/NS.2 DATED
07/02/2024 ISSUED BY THE DEVASWOM
COMMISSIONER.
