In the Matter of Travancore Devaswom Board - Suo Motu Proceedings Initiated

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN ``` ``` & ``` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR ``` ``` MONDAY, THE 29[TH] DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 7TH BHADRA, 1944 ``` ``` DBP NO.37OF 2022 ``` ``` IN THE MATTER OF TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD - SUO MOTU PROCEEDINGS INITIATED - BASED ON THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY SRI.C.R.RADHAKRISHNAN, RETIRED DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD ALLEGING CORRUPTION IN TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD - REG. ``` ``` ------------ ``` ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` SUO MOTU ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** ``` 1TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD DEVASWOM HEAD QUARTERS, NANTHANCODE, KAWDIAR POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695003, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001 ``` ``` BY ADVS. SHRI.G.BIJU,SC,TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD GOVERNMENT PLEADER ``` ## **`SRI S.RAJMOHAN - SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER`** ## **`THIS DEVASWOM BOARD PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR`** ``` ADMISSION ON 29.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 2 DBP No.37 of 2022 ## **O R D E R** Anil K. Narendran, J. from one Sri.C.R.Radhakrishnan, Retired Deputy Commissioner, Travancore Devaswom Board, alleging corruption in the matter of postings in Travancore Devaswom Board. The address of the complainant is not disclosed in the complaint. The allegation in the complaint pertains to corrupt practices in the Travancore Devaswom Board, while posting officers in the post of Finance Commissioner, upgradation of the post of Thulabharam Commissioner to the rank of Commissioner to bring the Estate Officer under the Devaswom Commissioner. 2. On 26.07.2022, when this DBP came up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board pointed out the provisions under the Travancore Devaswom Board Officers and Servants Service Rules, 2022, which deals with method of appointment and qualification for the post of Thulabharam Commissioner, Executive Engineer, etc. The learned counsel submitted that the allegations in the complaint are baseless and that an affidavit on behalf of the Secretary of the Travancore Devaswom Board shall be placed on record by 01.08.2022. 3 DBP No.37 of 2022 3. The 1[st] respondent has filed a detailed affidavit, producing therewith Annexure R1(a), Travancore Devaswom Board Officers and Servants Service Rules, 2022. Paragraphs 4 to 10 of that affidavit read thus: “4. It is alleged in the complaint that the higher posts in the service of the Board are rearranged to accommodate certain persons, the post of Finance Commissioner is downgraded to the cadre of Deputy Commissioner, the post of Thiruvabharanam Commissioner is upgraded to the cadre of Commissioner, steps are being taken to bring the Estate Office under Deputy Commissioner. It is also alleged that the Board President and Member P.M. Thankappan have received lakhs of rupees as bribe. The Executive Officer post of Sabarimala was given to one Union Leader accepting Rs.25 lakhs by Kottayam native Thankappan. Further Thankappan is demanding lakhs of rupees for appointment of Executive Engineers etc. 5. It is respectfully submitted that the cadre of Thiruvabharanam Commissioner and that of Finance Commissioner (Finance and Accounts. Officer/Devaswom Accounts Officer) is clearly stipulated in the Travancore Devaswom Board Officers and Servants Service Rules, 2022. As per the above Rule, the post of Thiruvabharanam Commissioner is in the cadre of Devaswom Commissioner and the same is a promotion post from the cadre of Deputy Devaswom Commissioner. [see Rule 5(1)(a)(2)]. The post of Finance and Accounts Officer/Devaswom Accounts Officer is in the cadre of Deputy Devaswom Commissioner and the same is a promotion post from the cadre of Assistant Devaswom Commissioner [see Rule 5(1)(a)(4)]. The appointment to the above posts are made from a select list prepared on seniority and merit and approved 4 DBP No.37 of 2022 by the Departmental Promotion Committee as per Rule 6(1) (a)(2) & (4) of the above Rules. True copy of the Travancore Devaswom Board Officers and Servants Service Rules, 2022 is produced herewith and marked as Annexure-R1(a). Further the Board does not have an idea to bring the Estate Office under Deputy Commissioner and no discussions/deliberations were made in this regard so far. 6. It is submitted that the post of Executive Engineer is a promotion post from the post of Assistant Executive Engineer as per Rule 8(3) & (4) of Annexure-A1 Rules. The above post is also filled from a select list prepared based on seniority and merit and approved by the Departmental Promotion Committee as per Rule 9(3) & (4) of the above Rules. There is no direct recruitment to the post of Executive Engineer. 7. It is submitted that the cadre strength of Deputy Devaswom Commissioners in the service of the Board is twelve. The transfer and posting of Deputy Devaswom Commissioners are made by the Board considering its administrative exigencies and convenience. There is no complaint with regard to the posting of the Executive Officer, Sabarimala from any of the Deputy Devaswom Commissioners in the service of the Board. The transfer and posting was made after conducting an enquiry by the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance & Security, Travancore Devaswom Board with respect to the credentials of the proposed officer and after obtaining sanction from this Hon'ble Court. 8. Thus, it is abundantly clear from the facts and materials stated above that the allegations contained in the complaint are absolutely baseless, without any iota of truth and unsupported by any materials. 9. It is submitted that the allegations in the complaint are vague, indefinite and without any substance. The complaint 5 DBP No.37 of 2022 does not disclose a definite address of the complaint and this is essentially an anonymous complaint, which is not liable to be entertained by this Hon'ble Court in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in **Divine Retreat Centre Vs. State of Kerala & others [(2008) 3 SCC 542]** . The character and credentials of the masked complainant are not available for verification. The complaint simply pours corruption allegations against the Hon'ble President and Member of the Board, who hold a position of honor and respect in the society. Their unblemished reputation earned through lifelong relentless, dedicated and committed service to the society is sought to be pinpointed in the shadow of doubt through this single line complaint -unsupported by any material. 10. It is respectfully submitted that the allegations in the complaint are deliberately made to tarnish the reputation of the Hon'ble President and Member of the Board and the same is nothing but an abuse of the process of law. It is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may not allow its process to be misused for oblique considerations by masked phantoms.” 4. On 08.08.2022, when this DBP came up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board sought adjournment to verify the identity of the complainant, since it is stated that he is a retired Deputy Devaswom Commissioner. 5. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board for the 1[st] respondent and also the learned Senior Government Pleader for the 1[st] respondent State. 6. The allegation made in the complaint dated 02.06.2022 6 DBP No.37 of 2022 is that there is corruption in the matter of appointment to the post of Thiruvabharanam Commissioner, Finance and Accounts Officer/ Devaswom Accounts Officer (formerly Finance Commissioner) and Executive Engineer. It is alleged that the Board is attempting to lower the post of Finance Commissioner to the cadre of Deputy Commissioner and also to bring the Estate Office under the Deputy Devaswom Commissioner. It is alleged that there is corruption in the appointment of the Executive Officer, Sabarimala. 7. The allegations contained in the complaint dated 02.06.2022 are denied in the affidavit filed by the 1[st] respondent Board, which is one dated 01.08.2022. A copy of the Travancore Devaswom Board Officers and Servants Service Rules, 2022 is produced along with the said affidavit, as Annexure R1(a). 8. In the affidavit dated 01.08.2022, it is pointed out that, the method of appointment to the post of Thiruvabharanam Commissioner is by promotion from the cadre of Deputy Devaswom Commissioner, from a select list prepared based on seniority and merit and approved by the Departmental Promotion Committee. Similarly, the method of appointment to the post of Finance and Accounts Officer/Devaswom Accounts Officer (formerly Finance Commissioner) is by promotion from the category of Assistant Devaswom Commissioner, from a select list prepared based on 7 DBP No.37 of 2022 seniority and merit and approved by the Departmental Promotion Committee. The method of appointment to the post of Executive Engineer (Civil) and Executive Engineer (Electrical) is by promotion, from a select list prepared based on seniority and merit from qualified candidates, approved by the Departmental Promotion Committee. 9. The learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board would point out that, as per the sub-rule (3) of Rule 3 of the Kerala Devaswom Recruitment Board Rules, 2015, the candidates for appointment to the selection categories and grades of the service shall be chosen by the Departmental Promotion Committee constituted by the Board, which shall consist of one member from the Devaswom Recruitment Board as Chairman, a member of the Devaswom Board as member and Convener and a member nominated by the Government. 10. In the affidavit dated 01.08.2022, it is stated that the posting of Executive Officer in Sabarimala Devaswom is made after verifying the credentials of the officer by the Superintendent of Police and the Chief Vigilance Security Officer of the Travancore Devaswom Board. The decisions taken by the Board after taking note of the report of the Superintendent of Police and the Chief Vigilance Security Officer, in posting officers at Sabarimala are being 8 DBP No.37 of 2022 placed before this Court, along with the report of the Vigilance Officer. 11. In the affidavit dated 01.08.2022, the specific stand taken by the 1[st] respondent Board is that the promotions and postings of various officers who are governed by the provisions under the Travancore Devaswom Board Officers and Servants Service Rules, 2022 are made strictly in accordance with the provisions contained therein. The Board has not even taken a decision to bring the post of Estate Officer under the Deputy Commissioner and no discussion/deliberations were ever made in this regard. In view of the aforesaid stand taken in the affidavit filed by the 1[st] respondent dated 01.08.2022, we find no reason to proceed with this DBP further. 12. Relying on the decision of the Apex Court in **Divine Retreat Centre v. State of Kerala & others [(2008) 3 SCC 542]** the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board would contend that a complaint with vague and indefinite allegations, which does not even disclose the correct address of the complainant, which is essentially an anonymous complaint, cannot be the basis for initiating _suo motu_ proceedings by this Court. The character and credentials of the masked complainant are not available for verification. The complaint, which is not supported by 9 DBP No.37 of 2022 any materials, contains allegations of corruption against the President and Members of the Travancore Devaswom Board. The allegations in the complaint are made deliberately to tarnish their reputation. Therefore, the complaint is nothing but an abuse of the process of the Court. 13. 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 sub-section (3) of Section 1 of the Act, substituted by the Kerala Adaptation of Laws Order, 1956, Part I of the Act shall extend to Travancore, Part II of the Act shall extend to Cochin and Part III of the Act shall extend to the whole of the State of Kerala, excluding the Malabar District. 14. Chapter II of the Act deals with the Travancore Devaswom. Section 3 of the Act deals with vesting of administration in Board. Section 4 of the Act deals with constitution of the Travancore Devaswom Board. As per sub-section (2) of Section 4, the Board shall be a body corporate having perpetual succession and a common seal with power to hold and acquire properties for and on behalf of the incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments under the 10 DBP No.37 of 2022 management of the Board. 15. Section 15 of the Act deals with vesting of jurisdiction in the Board. As per sub-section (1) of Section 15, subject to the provisions of Chapter III of Part I, all rights, authority and jurisdiction belonging to or exercised by the Ruler of Travancore prior to the first day of July, 1949, in respect of Devaswoms and Hindu Religious Endowments shall vest in and be exercised by the Board in accordance with the provisions of this Act. As per subsection (2) of Section 15, the Board shall exercise all powers of direction, control and supervision over the incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms and Hindu Religious Endowments under their jurisdiction. 16. Section 15A of the Act, inserted by Act 5 of 2007, with effect from 12.04.2007, deals with duties of the Board. As per Section 15A, it shall be the duty of the Board to perform the following functions, namely, (i) to see that the regular traditional rites and ceremonies according to the practice prevalent in the religious institutions are performed promptly; (ii) to monitor whether the administrative officials and employees and also the employees connected with religious rites are functioning properly; (iii) to ensure proper maintenance and upliftment of the Hindu religious institutions; (iv) to establish and maintain proper facilities 11 DBP No.37 of 2022 in the temples for the devotees. Section 16 of the Act deals with supervision and control by the Board. As per Section 16, the Board shall, subject to the provisions of Part I of the Act, exercise supervision and control over the acts and proceedings of all officers and servants of the Board and of the Devaswom Department. 17. Section 24 of the Act deals with maintenance of Devaswoms, etc., out of Devaswom Fund. Section 27 of the Act deals with Devaswom properties. Section 31 of the Act deals with management of Devaswoms. As per Section 31, subject to the provisions of Part I and the rules made thereunder, the Board shall manage 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 the festivals in every temple according to its usage. ## 18. In **Rajani P. Kuttan and another v. State of Kerala** **and others [2021 (6) KHC 513]** a Division Bench of this Court noticed that among the 1250 temples managed by the Travancore - Devaswom Board, only 60 major temples are self sufficient and the rest are being managed utilising the surplus income from Sabarimala Devaswom. The total number of sanctioned posts in various categories in the Travancore Devaswom Board is 5692 and the total number of pensioners is 5749. The major source of 12 DBP No.37 of 2022 revenue of the Travancore Devaswom Board is the income received by way of offering by the devotees, the amount received from vazhipadu and the revenue generated through the auction of temple premises for various activities in connection with rituals and festivals in the temples. Paragraph 59 of the said decision reads thus: “59. The Financial position of the Devaswom Board:- The competent officer of the Devaswom Board filed an affidavit dated 14.06.2021 stating its financial position. It is submitted that there are 1250 temples under the Administrative Control of the Devaswom Board. The total number of sanctioned posts in various categories in the Devaswom Board is 5692, and the total number of pensioners is 5749. It is further submitted that the major sources of revenue of the Devaswom Board are the income received by way of offerings from devotees, the amount received from vazhipadu, and the revenue generated through the auction of the temple premises for various activities in connection with rituals and festivals in the temples. Besides this, the Devaswom Board gets an approximate sum of 14 crores per annum by way of the rent of the buildings owned by it. The annual contribution from the State Government under Article 290A of the Constitution of India is Rs.80 lakhs. It is further submitted that among the 1250 temples managed by the Devaswom Board, only 60 major - temples are self sufficient, and the rest are being managed utilising the surplus income from Sabarimala Devaswom. Now, due to the spread of the Covid-19 pandemic, the temples remain closed, and the major source of income has come down. The Devaswom Board is finding it difficult even to pay the salary of the existing employees. The pleadings regarding 13 DBP No.37 of 2022 the financial position of the Devaswom Board in the affidavit dated 14.06.2021 have not been controverted by the ## 19. 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 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.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 14 DBP No.37 of 2022 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 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 15 DBP No.37 of 2022 error of law in ignoring this important aspect of the law although it had a direct bearing on the controversy before it.” (underline supplied) ## 20. 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 are required 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 fences 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. 21. 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]** the Apex Court emphasised that it is the duty of the courts to protect and safeguard 16 DBP No.37 of 2022 the interest and properties of the religious and charitable institutions. 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 therefore is the guardian of the Deity and apart from the jurisdiction under Section 103 of the Land Reforms Act, 1957 viz. the powers of revision, the High Court is having inherent jurisdiction and the doctrine of parents patriae will also apply in exercising the jurisdiction. Therefore, when a complaint has been raised by the Temple Advisory Committee, which was formed by the devotees of the Temple, about the loss of properties of the Temple itself, the truth of the same can be gone into by the High Court in these proceedings. 22. In **Suneesh K.S. [ILR 2022 (1) Ker. 1091: 2022 SCC OnLine Ker 611]** a Division Bench of this Court in which both of us were parties held that, the properties of deities and temples are required to be protected and safeguarded from usurpation or encroachment in any manner. Persons entrusted with the duty to manage such properties should be vigilant to prevent such usurpation or encroachment. When such usurpation or encroachment is possible only with the passive or active collusion of the authorities concerned, such acts of ‘fences eating the crops’ 17 DBP No.37 of 2022 should be dealt with sternly. The officers concerned and also the 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 usurpation or encroachment, wrongful claims or misappropriation. Therefore, the concerned Assistant Devaswom Commissioner and the Administrative Officer shall take stern action against those who have defaulted payment of instalments in respect of the Kuthaka items, in violation of the tender conditions, if found necessary, after seeking police assistance. If any such request is received, it is the duty of the concerned Station House Officer to render necessary assistance to the concerned Assistant Devaswom Commissioner or the Administrative Officer, in order to protect and safeguard the properties of deities and temples from usurpation or encroachment in any manner. Proceedings under clause (23) of the tender - conditions shall also be initiated against such defaulters, for black listing. In the said decision rendered on 01.02.2022, the Secretary of the Travancore Devaswom Board was directed to issue a circular, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of that judgment, requiring the concerned Assistant Devaswom Commissioner and the Administrative Officer to take stern action against those who have defaulted payment of instalments in respect 18 DBP No.37 of 2022 of the Kuthaka items, in violation of the tender conditions. 23. In **Abu K.S. v. Travancore Devaswom Board and others [2022 SCC OnLine Ker 1642]** [judgment dated 09.02.2022 in W.P.(C)No.2254 of 2022] a Division Bench of this Court, in which both of us were parties, was dealing with a case in which Kuthaka right for running Aymanam Sri Narasimha-swami Auditorium (sadyalayam) constructed by the Travancore Devaswom Board was auctioned for a period of two years from 01.08.2019 to 31.07.2021, for Rs.2,41,000/-. The average monthly income generated from the said building constructed by the Travancore Devaswom Board by spending several lakhs of rupees was only Rs.10,000/-. Relying on the law laid down by the Apex Court in **M.V.** **Ramasubbiar [(1979) 2 SCC 65** ] this Court held that, while auctioning the right for running that sadyalayam, the Travancore Devaswom Board and its officials have to ensure that proper income to the Board is generated from the said building. In case of any default committed by the successful bidder in remitting the balance auction amount, electricity charges or any other statutory dues payable as per the tender conditions, the concerned Assistant Devaswom Commissioner and the Sub Group Officer have to take prompt action against such bidder and the said fact has to be promptly reported to the concerned officer in the Estate Division of 19 DBP No.37 of 2022 the Travancore Devaswom Board. 24. In **Abu K.S. [2022 SCC OnLine Ker 1642]** the writ petitioner, the successful bidder, remitted only 50% of the auction amount on 18.07.2019. Though he had defaulted payment of the balance amount of Rs.1,20,500/-, he was permitted to continue to occupy the sadyalayam, even beyond the period of auction, i.e., 31.07.2021. The concerned Assistant Commissioner and the Sub Group Officer have not taken any action against the successful bidder till the order of this Court dated 01.02.2022, whereby they were directed to take over possession of the sadyalayam forthwith, if found necessary with police assistance. In such circumstances, in the said decision, this Court deprecated in the strongest words the conduct of the concerned Assistant Commissioner and the Sub Group Officer and also the concerned officers in the Estate Division of the Travancore Devaswom Board in taking no action against the successful bidder, who was a defaulter. In the said decision, this Court found that, the concerned officers of the Travancore Devaswom Board have not shown reasonable diligence in the manner of an ordinary prudent man of business to conduct his own affairs. Since, such irregularities in the conduct of auction for running auditoriums/sadyalayams in the temples under the management of the Travancore Devaswom Board cannot be 20 DBP No.37 of 2022 permitted in future, this Court directed Registry to initiate _suo motu_ proceedings in that matter. 25. In view of the provisions under Section 15A of the Act it is the duty of the 1[st] respondent Board to monitor whether the administrative officials and employees and also the employees connected with religious rites are functioning properly. As per Section 16 the Board shall exercise supervision and control over the acts and proceedings of all officers and servants of the Board. The status of the Board is that of a Trustee in management of the properties of Devaswoms. Therefore, it is the duty of the Board as a Trustee of the property of the Devaswoms to be faithful to the Trust and the Board has to exercise reasonable diligence in the manner of an ordinary prudent man of business would conduct his own affairs. The Board, as a Trustee, could not therefore occasion any loss to the Devaswoms. The posting of upright and efficient officers in various key posts, which comes under the purview of the Travancore Devaswom Board Officers and Servants Service Rules, 2022, is highly essential to ensure proper management of the properties of the incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms, which the Board is holding as a Trustee. A person interested in the affairs of a temple or Devaswom can certainly bring to the notice of this Court any irregularity or act of corruption on the part of the 1[st] 21 DBP No.37 of 2022 respondent Board, seeking interference in exercise of _parens patriae_ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In appropriate cases, this Court can invoke its jurisdiction, based on such complaints made by the devotees or persons interested in the affairs of the temple or Devaswom. ## 26. In **Divine Retreat Centre v. State of Kerala & others** **[(2008) 3 SCC 542]** the Apex Court was dealing with a case in which the order of this Court in setting the criminal law in motion based on an anonymous petition against an institution by name, Divine Treat Centre, invoking the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was under challenge. In the said decision the Apex Court found that the direction issued by this Court to constitute a Special Investigation Team to conduct investigation on the allegations contained in the anonymous petition is legally unsustainable. The said decision of the Apex Court on an entirely different factual matrix and as such the law laid down in that decision has no application to the facts of the case on hand, which is governed by the statutory provisions referred to hereinbefore and also the law laid down in the decisions referred to supra. 27. It is pertinent to note at this juncture the irregularity committed by the Travancore Devaswom Board in permitting 22 DBP No.37 of 2022 Purohits to conduct ‘Balitharpanam’ at Aluva Manappuram on all days other than Karkidaka Vavu, Thula Vavu and Sivarathri festival days, after collecting a negligible fee, without inviting sealed quotations came to the notice of this Court based on a press report that appeared in a daily dated 17.02.2022. DBP No.6 of 2022 registered _suo motu_ based on that press report was disposed of by the order dated 08.04.2022 **[Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and others – 2022 (3) KHC 413],** issuing various directions. Paragraph 39 of that order reads thus: “39. In the above circumstances, this DBP is disposed of with the following directions; (i) the Travancore Devaswom Board shall auction the right to conduct balitharpanam by purohits/shantis in 20 to 24 balitharas at Aluva Shivratri Manappuram, as per the layout plan in Annexure R2(a), on all days other than Karkidaka Vavu, Thula Vavu and Shivratri festival days, by inviting sealed quotations, on yearly basis, after issuing a proper notification with layout plan of balitharas and also base price (upset price) of each balitharas. (ii) the Travancore Devaswom Board shall auction the right to conduct balitharpanam by purohits/shantis, during Karkidaka Vavu, Thula Vavu and Shivratri festival days, in 60 to 80 balitharas at Aluva Shivratri Manappuram, after issuing a proper notification with layout plan of balitharas, classifying balitharas facing the river in 'A' sector and those facing the temple in 'B' sector, and also base price (upset price) of each balitharas. (iii) purohits/shantis who have auctioned balitharas in Aluva Shivratri Manappuram shall be issued with photo identity cards 23 DBP No.37 of 2022 and the 4[th] respondent Administrative Officer shall ensure that only those purohits/shantis who have been issued with such identity cards alone are conducting balitharpanam in the balitharas in Aluva Shivratri Manappuram. (iv) the 6[th] respondent Superintendent of Police and the 7[th] respondent Station House Officer shall take necessary steps to ensure that there is no law and order issues in connection with balitharpanam in Aluva Shivratri Manappuram during Karkidaka Vavu, Thula Vavu and Shivratri festival days. In addition to the permanent CCTV cameras, sufficient number of temporary CCTV cameras shall be installed at Aluva Shivaratri Manappuram to oversee the activities and sufficient number of police personnel shall be deployed to ensure that no untoward incidents happen in an around Shivratri Manappuram.” 28. This Court initiated another _suo motu_ proceedings, which was numbered as DBP.No.3 of 2022, based on a news item that appeared in Mathrubhumi daily that the Travancore Devaswom Board has leased out Pamba-Thriveni Manappuram to a Trust for conducting a programme by name ‘Ramakatha’ from 19.09.2022 till 22.09.2022. In the order dated 16.02.2022 in that DBP, this Court found that when Pamba Manappuram is leased out to the Travancore Devaswom Board for the specific purpose of providing pilgrim facilities the Board should not have permitted Trust in question to put up structures, which occupied a major portion of Pamba Manappuram, causing obstruction and inconvenience to the pilgrims proceeding to Sannidhanam in connection with Kumba Maasa pooja. Therefore, this Court directed demolition of the entire 24 DBP No.37 of 2022 structures put up by the said Trust at Pamba Manappuram and accordingly those structures were removed. Thereafter, based on the report filed by the Special Commissioner, Sabarimala, DBP.No.9 of 2022 was registered, which was disposed of by the order dated 30.06.2022 **[Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and others 2022(5) KHC 349]** , with the following directions in paragraph 34 of that order; “34. When Pamba Manappuram assumes importance from the point of crowd management during festival season and also when Sabarimala Temple opens for Masa Pooja (monthly pooja), no constructions can be permitted at Pamba Manappuram. Pamba and Sabarimala are declared ‘Special Security Zones’ by the Kerala Police. Pamba Manappuram falls within the boundary of Periyar Tiger Reserve-West Division. The land at Pamba Manappuram is leased out to the Travancore Devaswom Board, specifically for providing pilgrim facilities, which cannot be permitted to be used for putting up structures like VIP tents, ‘Katha pandal’ or other temporary structures for conducting programmes, conventions, etc., especially when, during the last few seasons, flash floods occurred in Pamba, which inundated Pamba Manappuram unexpectedly as stated in the report of the learned Special Commissioner, Sabarimala. The photographs of the temporary constructions on Pamba Manappuram, reproduced hereinbefore at paragraph 23, would show that the temporary structures occupied a considerable extent of Pamba Manappuram. But for such constructions, the aforesaid area in Pamba Manappuram could have been used by the pilgrims during ‘Kumbamasa Pooja’. Such activities cannot be permitted in Pamba Manappuram, which has to be maintained without any 25 DBP No.37 of 2022 constructions, for the pilgrims to perform ritual bathing, ablutions and balitharpanam. Similarly, the use of helipad at Nilakkal has to be restricted for the pilgrims during festival seasons and ‘Masa Pooja’ (monthly pooja) and also for emergency operations. The use of the helipad shall be strictly in conformity with the requirements of the ‘Minimum Safety Requirement for Temporary Helicopter Landing Area’ [Annexure R3(e)], as directed by the Director General of Civil Aviation, with the permission of the competent authorities and prior intimation to the District Administration.” 29. In the above circumstances, we find no merits in the contentions raised by the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board on the maintainability of this DBP. In the result, this DBP is disposed of with the observation contained hereinbefore at paragraph 11. Sd/- **ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE** Sd/- **P.G. AJITHKUMAR JUDGE** PV 26 DBP No.37 of 2022 ## **`APPENDIX OF DBP 37/2022`** ## **`RESPONDENT ANNEXURES`** ``` ANNEXURE-R1(a)True copy of the Travancore Devaswom Board Officers and Servants Service Rules, 2022. ```