Kerala High Court
Sri. B. Govindarajan Nair vs Sri. Binesh K on 18 August, 2025
Author: Anil K.Narendran
Bench: Anil K.Narendran
1
RP No.944 of 2025 2025:KER:61247
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALEE KRISHNA S.
MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 27TH SRAVANA, 1947
RP NO. 944 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 02.07.2025 IN DBP NO.23 OF 2024
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 3 AND 5 IN THE DBP:
1 SRI. B. GOVINDARAJAN NAIR
AGED 80 YEARS
'RADHIKA' VIKRAS 47, KOPPARAMBU LANE, POONITHURA P.O.,
ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682038
2 SRI. T.V. LEELADHARAN,
PKRRA 41, 'GEETHAM', KUREEKAT LANE, POONITHURA
KOTTARAM ROAD, POONITHURA P.O., ERNAKULAM., PIN -
682038
BY ADV SHRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1, 2 AND 4 IN THE DBP:
1 SRI. BINESH K
VIKRAS 49, GREESHMA, POONITHURA P.O., ERNAKULAM., PIN
- 682038
2 THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ROUND NORTH, THRISSUR.,
PIN - 680001
3 THE SPECIAL DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER,
COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, ROUND NORTH, THRISSUR., PIN -
680001
2
RP No.944 of 2025 2025:KER:61247
4 SRI. K SREENIVASAN,
PKRRA 53, KOPPARAMBU LANE, POONITHURA P.O, ERNAKULAM.,
PIN - 682039
SRI.K.P SUDHEER, SC, CDB
SRI.A.T ANILKUMAR
SRI.P RAMACHANDRAN
THIS REVIEW PETITION WAS FINALLY HEARD ON 28.7.2025, THE
COURT ON 18.8.2025 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
3
RP No.944 of 2025 2025:KER:61247
ORDER
Muralee Krishna, J.
The respondents 3 and 5 in DBP No.23 of 2024 filed this
review petition under Order XLVII Rule 1 read with Section 114 of
the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking modifications of the
directions in paragraph 34 of the judgment dated 02.07.2025.
2. DBP No.23 of 2024 was registered suo motu based on the
report No.3 of 2024 of the learned Ombudsman for Travancore
and Cochin Devaswom Board, pointing out the allegations raised
in Annexure-01 complaint received from a devotee alleging failure
in the proper upkeep of accounts by the Temple Advisory
Committee of Poonithura Kottaram Sree Krishna Temple. By the
common Order/Judgment dated 02.07.2025, along with
W.P.(C)No.18250 of 2024, this Court disposed of the DBP. The
operative portion of that Order/Judgment reads as under:
"In the result, W.P.(C)No.18250 of 2024 stands dismissed.
However, DBP No.23 of 2024 is disposed of directing the 3 rd
and 5th respondents therein to visit the Devaswom office,
where they claim as kept the accounts of the Committee for
the relevant period, along with an Officer to be deputed by
RP No.944 of 2025 2025:KER:61247
the 6th respondent in the writ petition, namely, the Deputy
Director of the Kerala State Audit Department and the
officer deputed by the Cochin Devaswom Board and to
verify whether the accounts of the Temple Advisory
committee of the period 2012 to 2015 is kept in that office
as contended in the counter affidavit filed by the 3 rd
respondent. Thereafter, the Commissioner, Cochin
Devaswom Board, shall hear all the parties concerned and
take a decision as to the accounts of the period not
submitted by the Temple Advisory committee and place the
same before the Board for taking appropriate decision".
3. Heard the learned counsel for the review
petitioners/respondents 3 and 5, the learned counsel for the 1 st
respondent, the learned Standing Counsel for the Cochin
Devaswom Board and the learned Amicus Curiae for the learned
Ombudsman.
4. The grievance of the petitioners is that in the counter
affidavit filed by the petitioners, it is stated that the Temple
Advisory Committee had handed over all the records and audited
account at the office of the Cochin Devaswom Board and it was
audited and a reply was also issued to the Committee and this
reply is kept in the Godrej almirah in the office. But in the
Order/Judgment dated 02.07.2025, this Court took it as the
RP No.944 of 2025 2025:KER:61247
Committee kept the account itself in the Godrej almirah.
Therefore, the said aspect, if not clarified, would cause irreparable
hardships to the petitioners.
5. In paragraph 6 of the Order/Judgment dated
02.07.2025, we extracted paragraph 2 of the counter affidavit
dated 29.10.2024 filed by the review petitioners in the DBP. On
going through that paragraph in the counter affidavit filed by the
review petitioners, it can be seen that in that counter affidavit
the review petitioners contended that the Committee had handed
over all the records and audited account statement before the
Devaswom Board and to their knowledge, the Devaswom Board
has audited the account and the one and only objection raised is
to the effect that Secretary has put only an initial in certain
documents, instead of full signature. It is further stated in that
counter affidavit that a communication in this regard was issued
to the Committee, and it was kept in the locker of the Godrej
Almirah in the green room. The keys of the said Godrej almirah
were handed over to the Devaswom Officer while vacating the
office.
6. But, the perusal of the order/judgment dated
RP No.944 of 2025 2025:KER:61247
02.07.2025 shows that when the matters were taken up for
hearing, the learned counsel for the review petitioners submitted
that the Commitee had handed over all the accounts to the
Devaswom Board and it was kept in the locker of Godrej Almirah
kept in the green room and keys of the almirah were also handed
over to the Devaswom officer while vacating the office. What
happened to them thereafter is not known to the review
petitioners. It is based on that submission, this Court issued the
directions in the order/judgment. Even now, the review petitioners
have no case that they have not made such a submission when
the matter were finally heard on 11.06.2025. It appears that now
the review petitioners have come up with the above petition as an
afterthought. Since the direction was issued based on the
submissions made at the time of hearing the matters, we find no
sufficient circumstances to review the order/judgment dated
02.07.2025 as sought for.
In the result, the review petition stands dismissed.
However, we make it clear that while deciding the matter, as
directed in the judgment/order dated 02.07.2025, the
Commissioner, Cochin Devaswom Board shall also take into
RP No.944 of 2025 2025:KER:61247
consideration of the aforesaid contention of the review
petitioners/respondents 3 and 5 in their counter affidavit.
Sd/-
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE
Sd/-
sks MURALEE KRISHNA S., JUDGE
