DBP No.49 of 2023, In the matter of Travancore Devaswom Board - P.D.

1 DBP No.49 of 2023 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANIL K. NARENDRAN** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 27[TH] DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 6TH ASHADHA, 1945** **DBP NO.49 OF 2023** **IN THE MATTER OF TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD - P.D.** **MANIKANTESWARA DEVASWOM – COMPLAINT REGARDING COLLECTION OF EXORBITANT RATES FOR POOJA ITEMS AND NON-DISPLAY OF THE RATES OF THE ITEMS SOLD IN THE POOJA STALL – SUO MOTU PROCEEDINGS INITIATED - REG.** **------------** ## **PETITIONER:** **SUO MOTU** **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (DEVASWOM) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001** - **2 THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NANTHANCODE, KAWDIAR POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 003** - **3 DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, DEVASWOM BUILDINGS, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 6950 05** - **4 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, KOTTARAKKARA GROUP, KOTTARAKARA P.O., KOLLAM 691 506** - **5 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER P.D.MANIKANTESWARAM DEVASWOM, KOTTARAKKARA P.O., KOLLAM 691 506** - **6 TEMPLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE** 2 DBP No.49 of 2023 **P.D.MANIKANDESWARAM DEVASWOM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KOTTARAKARA P.O., KOLLAM 691 506 SRI S.RAJMOHAN - SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER ; SRI G.BIJU - STANDING COUNSEL -TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD** **THIS DEVASWOM BOARD PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** 3 DBP No.49 of 2023 ## **ORDER** ## **Anil K. Narendran, J.** This DBP is registered _suo motu_ , vide proceedings dated 16.06.2023, based on a complaint dated 03.05.2023 made by a devotee of P.D. Manikanteswara Devaswom, in which it is alleged that in the pooja stall in Sree Maha Ganapathy Temple, exorbitant rates are being collected for pooja items like coconut, Karukamala, Koovalamala, Poomala, etc. Though the matter was brought to the notice of the Travancore Devaswom Board, no action has been taken. The price list is also not exhibited in the pooja stall. 2. On 20.06.2023, when this DBP came up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board sought time to get instructions. 3. Heard the learned Senior Government Pleader for the 1[st] respondent State and the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board for respondents 2 to 5. 4. The learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board, on instructions from the officer holding charge of the 4[th] respondent Assistant Devaswom Commissioner, would submit that since the price list is exhibited in the pooja stall, the 4 DBP No.49 of 2023 allegations contained in the complaint that no price list is exhibited in the pooja stall in Sree Maha Ganapathy Temple and that, exorbitant rates are being collected in the pooja stall for pooja items like coconut, Karukamala, Koovalamala, Poomala, etc., are absolutely without any basis. 5. 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 Section 15A of the Act, which deals with duties of the Board, it shall be the duty of the Board to perform the functions enumerated in clauses (i) to (iv) of Section 15A, which includes duty to see that regular traditional rites and ceremonies according to the practice prevalent in the religious institutions are performed promptly; to monitor whether the administrative officials and employees and also t he employees connected with religious rites are functioning properly; and to establish and maintain proper facilities in the temples for the devotees. As per Section 31 of the Act, which deals with management of Devaswoms, subject to the provisions of Part-I of the Act and the rules made thereunder, the Board shall manage 5 DBP No.49 of 2023 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 festivals in every temple according to its usage. ## 6. In **M.V. Ramasubbiar v. Manicka Narasimachara** **[(1979) 2 SCC 65]** , in the context of Sections 49, 51 and 52 of the Trusts Act, 1882, the Apex Court explained the nature of the fiduciary position of the trustee and his duties and obligations. It is the duty of the trustees of the property to be faithful to the Trust and execute any document with reasonable diligence in the manner of an ordinary prudent man of business would conduct his own affairs. A trustee could not therefore occasion any loss to the Trust and it is his duty to sell the property, if at all that was necessary, to best advantage. Paragraph 4 of that decision reads thus; “4. There is some controversy on the question whether Defendant 1 made an outright purchase of the suit property for and on behalf of the trust for Rs. 21,500 on April 19, 1959, or whether he intended to purchase it for himself and then decided to pass it on to the trust, for defendants have led their evidence to show that the property was allowed to be sold for Rs. 6 DBP No.49 of 2023 21,500/-, which was less than its market value, as it was meant for use by the trust and that Defendant 1 was not acting honestly when he palmed off the property to his son soon after by the aforesaid sale deed Ext.B13 dated July 14, 1960. The fact, however, remains that Defendant 1 was the trustee of the property, and it was his duty to be faithful to the trust and to execute it with reasonable diligence in the manner an ordinary prudent man of business would conduct his own affairs. He could not therefore occasion any loss to the trust and it was his duty to sell the property, if at all that was necessary, to best advantage. It has in fact been well recognised as an inflexible rule that a person in a fiduciary position like a trustee is not entitled to make a profit for himself or a member of his family. It can also not be gainsaid that he is not allowed to put himself in any such position in which a conflict may arise between his duty and personal interest, and so the control of the trustee's discretionary power prescribed by Section 49 of the Act and the prohibition contained in Section 51 that the trustee may not use or deal with the trust property for his own profit or for any other purpose unconnected with the trust, and the equally important prohibition in Section 52 that the trustee may not, directly or indirectly, buy the trust property on his own account or as an agent for a third person, cast a heavy 7 DBP No.49 of 2023 responsibility upon him in the matter of discharge of his duties as the trustee. It does not require much argument to proceed to the inevitable further conclusion that the Rule prescribed by the aforesaid sections of the Act cannot be evaded by making a sale in the name of the trustee's partner or son, for that would, in fact and substance, indirectly benefit the trustee. Where therefore a trustee makes the sale of a property belonging to the trust, without any compelling reason, in favour of his son, without obtaining the permission of the court concerned, it is the duty of the court, in which the sale is challenged, to examine whether the trustee has acted reasonably and in good faith or whether he has committed a breach of the trust by benefitting himself from the transaction in an indirect manner. The sale in question has therefore to be viewed with suspicion and the High Court committed an error of law in ignoring this important aspect of the law although it had a direct bearing on the controversy before it.” 7. The provisions under the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act make it explicitly clear that the role assigned to the Travancore Devaswom Board in the administration, supervision and control of incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms is that of a trustee in the management of the properties vested in the Deity, which is bound 8 DBP No.49 of 2023 to administer, supervise and control incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms in accordance with the provisions under the said Act. The Board and its officials are duty bound to function within the framework of the statute, by scrupulously following the stipulations contained therein and acting strictly in accordance with the settled legal principles relating to the administration of Hindu religious trust. The Board, being a trustee in the management of Devaswom properties, is legally bound to perform its duties with utmost care and caution. 8. In **Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and others [2022** - **SCC OnLine Ker 1997]** order dated 22.04.2022 in DBP No.10 of 2022 - a Division Bench of this Court in which both of us were parties was dealing with a DBP registered _suo motu_ , vide proceedings dated 19.03.2022, based on a news item that appeared in Manorama News online regarding irregularities in the sale of Vazhipadu items in Vaikom Sree Mahadeva Temple, especially, in the sale of ‘Koovalamala’. On 17.03.2022, a devotee On 17.03.2022, a devotee of Vaikom Sree Mahadeva Temple complained that Kesadipadam Koovalamala bought by him from the pooja stall was stale and short in size. A video on that complaint was widely circulated on social media. 9 DBP No.49 of 2023 9. In **Suo Motu [2022 SCC OnLine Ker 1997]** this Court noticed that Koovalamalas purchased by the devotees of Vaikom Sree Mahadeva Temple, spending Rs. 50/(thirumudimala) or Rs. 100/- (charthumala) or Rs. 200/(sheromala), are meant for adorning Lord Mahadeva (Lord Shiva), which is considered to be a very auspicious and sacred ritual while worshipping Lord Shiva. A ritual or pooja in the temple has to be performed by using pure Vazhipadu/pooja items. A Koovalamala made of stale or dry or decayed Koovala leaves cannot be used for adorning the Deity. A Kuthaka holder selling Koovalamala made of stale or dry or decayed Koovala leaves or selling substandard Vazhipadu/pooja items to the devotees should be dealt with iron hands by the competent authority in the Travancore Devaswom Board. The Temple Advisory Committee constituted under Section 31A of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act should keep constant vigil over the sale of Vazhipadu/pooja items in the pooja stall situated within the temple premises, in order to ensure that the Kuthaka holder is not selling any substandard Vazhipadu/pooja items to the devotees. 10. In the instant case, in the complaint dated 03.05.2023, 10 DBP No.49 of 2023 it is alleged that exorbitant rates are being collected for pooja items like coconut, Karukamala, Koovalamala, Poomala, etc., in the pooja stall in Sree Maha Ganapathy Temple under P.D. Manikanteswara Devaswom. Further, the price list is also not exhibited in the pooja stall. According to the complainant, though the matter was brought to the notice of the Travancore Devaswom Board, no action has been taken. 11. During the course of arguments, the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel, on instructions, is that since the price list is exhibited in the pooja stall, the allegations contained in the complaint that no price list is exhibited in the pooja stall in Sree Maha Ganapathy Temple and that, exorbitant rates are being collected in the pooja stall for pooja items like coconut, Karukamala, Koovalamala, Poomala, etc. are absolutely without any basis. 12. In view of the provisions under the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, the Travancore Devaswom Board, which is a trustee in the management of the properties of P.D. Manikanteswara Devaswom, is legally bound to perform its duties with utmost care and caution. The Board and its officials are duty bound to function within the framework of the statute, by 11 DBP No.49 of 2023 scrupulously following the stipulations contained therein and acting strictly in accordance with the settled legal principles relating to the administration of Hindu religious trust. The Board and its officials have to ensure that exorbitant rates are not being collected from the devotees, for the pooja items, in the pooja stall conducted by the Kuthaka holder in the premises of P.D. Manikanteswara Devaswom. The Board and its officials have also to ensure that the Kuthaka holder is not selling any substandard Vazhipadu/pooja items to the devotees. 13. The learned Standing Counsel has made available for the perusal of this Court a few photographs of the pooja stall, in order to show that a price list of pooja items is exhibited in that stall. A few of those photographs are reproduced hereunder; **==> picture [296 x 162] intentionally omitted <==** 12 DBP No.49 of 2023 **==> picture [235 x 145] intentionally omitted <==** **==> picture [140 x 160] intentionally omitted <==** 14. The Kuthaka holder has to exhibit the price list of pooja items on a board in front of the pooja stall, at a prominent place, instead of hanging it inside the shop, as seen in the photographs reproduced hereinbefore. The length of Karukamala, Koovalamala, etc., has also to be exhibited in the price list, especially when different rates are charged for Karukamala (small & large), Koovalamala (small & large), etc. Having considered the submissions made at the Bar, this DBP is disposed of by directing the 2[nd] respondent Travancore Devaswom Board and its officials, including respondents 3 to 5, to 13 DBP No.49 of 2023 ensure that the Kuthaka holders in the temples under the Management of the Board are exhibiting the price list of pooja items on a board in front of the pooja stall, at a prominent place, instead of hanging it inside the shop, as seen in the photographs reproduced hereinbefore. The length of Karukamala, Koovalamala, etc., has also to be exhibited in the price list, especially when different rates are charged for Karukamala (small & large), Koovalamala (small & large), etc. The Board shall instruct the 3[rd] respondent Devaswom Commissioner to issue general directions in this regard, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Sd/- ## **ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE** Sd/- ## **P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE** yd