Kazhakkoottam Kulangara Sree Krishna Swamy Temple Advisory Committee v. Travancore Devaswom Board and Others

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN`** ``` & ``` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR ``` # **`THURSDAY, THE 17[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 26TH KARTHIKA, 1944`** ``` WP(C) NO.22689 OF 2017 ``` ``` PETITIONER: ``` ``` KAZHAKOOTTAM KULANGARA SREEKRISHNASWAMY TEMPLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE KAZHAKOOTTAM KULANGARA SREEKRISHNASWAMY TEMPLE, TRIVANDRUM - 695 582 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY G. UDAYAKUMAR. ``` ``` BY ADVS. SRI.S.ANANTHAKRISHNAN SMT.ANU S NAIR SRI.N.K.SUBRAMANIAN ``` ``` RESPONDENTS: ``` ``` 1THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, TRIVANDRUM 695 003, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY 2STATE OF KERALA, DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM, REP. BY TOURISM SECRETARY 695 001 3THE DISTRICT TOURISM PROMOTION COUNCIL TRIVANDRUM, THE PERSON THAT BY ITS CHAIRMAN , THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR 695 001. *4PALACE NAGAR RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION REGISTER NO. 1595/99, KAZHAKOOTTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. *ADDITIONAL 4TH RESPONDENT IS IMPLEADED AS PER ``` 2 W.P.(C) No.22689 of 2017 ``` ORDER DATED 13/11/17 IN IA NO.17546/17 IN WP(C) 22689/17 ``` ``` *5THE UNION OF INDIA REP. BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF TOURISM, NEW DELHI *ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT 5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 26/3/2018 IN IA NO. 4885/18 IN WP(C) 22689/17. ``` ``` BY ADVS. SMT.A.SREEKALA, SC, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SUVIN R.MENON, CGC SMT.ALICE THOMAS SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON SR. SMT.SMITHA S.PILLAI SMT.M.C.SINY SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, SC, TDB SRI.K.SASIKUMAR, SC, TDB ``` ``` SRI S.RAJMOHAN - SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER ; SRI G.SANTHOSH KUMAR - STANDING COUNSEL - TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 3 W.P.(C) No.22689 of 2017 ## **J U D G M E N T** ## Anil K. Narendran, J The petitioner, who is the Temple Advisory Committee of Kulangara Sree Krishnaswami Temple, which is a Temple under the management of the 1[st] respondent Travancore Devaswom Board, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P1 order dated 22.02.2017 of the 1[st] respondent Board, whereby it was decided to enter into an agreement with the 2[nd] respondent Tourism Department for the construction of a hall, cafeteria, amphitheatre, etc., to be used as a pilgrim amenity centre. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the 1[st] respondent not to use the temple property for any other purpose other than for the activities of the temple and its devotees and in violation of Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950 and Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Rules, 1965. 2. On 10.07.2017, when this writ petition came up for admission, this Court admitted the matter on file. The learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board took notice 4 ## W.P.(C) No.22689 of 2017 on behalf of 1[st] respondent and the learned Government Pleader took notice on behalf of the respondents 2 and 3. This Court granted an interim stay of all further actions pursuant to Ext.P1, for a period of three months. The said interim order, which was extended from time to time, was extended until further orders on 02.07.2018. 3. Palace Nagar Residents Association, represented by its Secretary has filed I.A.No.17546 of 2017 seeking an order to get itself impleaded as additional 4[th] respondent. That application was allowed on 13.11.2017. The additional 4[th] respondent has filed a counter affidavit dated 13.01.2018 opposing the relief sought for in this writ petition. The petitioner has also filed reply affidavit dated 01.02.2018 producing therewith Exts.P7 to P12. The 2[nd] respondent has filed a counter affidavit dated 14.02.2018. The petitioner filed reply affidavit dated 10.03.2018. Additional counter affidavit on behalf of 2[nd] respondent was also filed on 04.04.2018. 4. On 04.04.2018, when this matter was taken up for consideration, this Court passed an order, which reads thus: “Learned Government Pleader submits that a fresh affidavit has been filed pointing out that the funds actually 5 W.P.(C) No.22689 of 2017 belong to the State Government and not of the Central Government. 2. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Devaswom Board submits that the version of the Devaswom Board was put forth based on the data provided to the Devaswom Board from the part of the Government to the effect that the source of funds was from the Central Government. It was, in the said circumstances, that the writ petitioner had filed an application to implead the Central Government in the party array, which was allowed on 26.03.2018. 3. In view of the somersault taken by the State Government (though the affidavit stated as filed today is still to form part of the records), learned Standing Counsel for the Devaswom Board seeks for time to file necessary affidavit and also to tender apology before this Court for the averment made in the affidavit already filed. Interim order stands extended by two months.” 5. On 15.10.2018, when this matter was taken up for consideration, this Court passed an order which reads thus: “During the course of hearing, Sri.Nandakumara Menon, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the 4[th] respondent herein submits that the property in question does not belong to the Devaswom and that the same is a 'puramboke'; by virtue of which, the petitioner 'Samithi' cannot sustain any dispute with regard to the alleged encroachment over the Devaswom property or with regard to the construction sought to be started. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the Devaswom, 6 W.P.(C) No.22689 of 2017 though had filed an affidavit dated 14.02.2018 earlier, decided to have it be withdrawn and has sought for permission by filing an additional affidavit referring to the facts and figures (not permitted so far). Reference is also made to the affidavit filed by the Government to the effect that the property is a 'puramboke' property. The learned senior counsel also submits with respect to Ext.R4(a), a copy of the settlement register, where the property having an extent of 1.96 acres in Survey No.885, has been described as a 'puramboke'. 2. On going through the materials, it is seen that at no point of time earlier, had the Government or the Devaswom any such case, that the property was a 'puramboke' land. The basic order, Ext.R2(a) dated 16.03.2017, issued by the Government mentions in the opening paragraph itself that the property belongs to the Temple and hence it is a Devaswom property. Ext.R2(d) sanction was given by the Devaswom on 22.02.2017, for proceeding with the development activities, wherein also the property is clearly shown as the 'Devaswom property'. It is evident from Ext.P9 dated 15.06.2017 issued by the Land Special Officer of the Travancore Devaswom Board, that the property was accepted by all concerned as the property belonging to the Temple/Devaswom till resurvey [particulars of the survey number, extent of land and such other details have been given therein]. The very same document also refers to the re-survey conducted and the consequences resulted, when the property came to be described as 'puramboke', showing the very same 7 W.P.(C) No.22689 of 2017 extent and survey number. In other words, there was no case for anybody till the 'resurvey' that the property was a 'puramboke' land; whereas the property was accepted always as 'Temple property/Devaswom land'. 3. In the said circumstance, it is for the Devaswom and for the Government to explain how they sought to assert before this Court that the property is a 'purmaboke' land and hence to permit them to proceed with the construction, that too by filing affidavits before this Court, which prima facie appear to be not correct or acceptable. Filing of false affidavit/reckless affidavit/proceedings in a casual manner before the Court may have to be held as an instance of Contempt of Court, by virtue of the law declared by the Apex Court in **Dhananjay Sharma v. State of Haryana and Ors. [AIR (1995) SC 1795].** The Government and the Travancore Devaswom Board are required to explain the incriminating circumstances noted above, before we proceed with further steps as to the course of action to be pursued. 6. On 28.10.2018, when this matter was taken up for consideration, this court passed an order which reads thus: “The petitioner, namely the Temple Advisory Committee of Kazhakoottam Kulangara Sreekrishnaswamy Temple, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P1 order dated 22.02.2017 issued by the 1[st] respondent Travancore Devaswom Board, whereby a decision has been taken to handover the temple property 8 W.P.(C) No.22689 of 2017 having an extent of 1½ Acres to the 2[nd] respondent State for the construction of a hall, cafeteria, amphitheater, rooms, etc. to be used as pilgrim amenities centre. Today, when this matter is taken up for consideration, the learned Senior Government Pleader and also the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board seek time to get instructions as to whether the project has already been dropped.” 7. On 28.10.2022, when this writ petition came up for consideration, the learned Senior Government Pleader and also the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board sought time to get instructions as to whether the project in question has already been dropped. 8. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Senior Government Pleader, the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board and the learned Senior Counsel for the party respondents. 9. The learned Senior Government Pleader has made available for the perusal of this Court, a copy of the Government Order dated 16.11.2022, whereby the administrative sanction granted for pilgrim heritage circuit at Attakulankara, Kazhakkoottam and Thiruvananthapuram was cancelled. The said order reads thus: 9 ## W.P.(C) No.22689 of 2017 " പിൽഗ്ിിം ഹെറി്റേജ് സർക്യൂ്ᨾ് അേ് ക്ുള്ങര, ക്ഴ്കൂ്ᨾിം, തിരുവന്ᩌപുരിം എ്ᩐ പ്ധതി്ി പരാമർശിം (1) ഗപക്ാരിം 4.95 ്റക്ാടി രൂപ്ിുഹട ഭരണാനുമതി നൽക്ി ഉ്തരവാ് രു്ᩐു. (2). ടി പ്ധതി്ിുഹട ഭാ്മാ് ക്ുള്ങര ഗശീക്ൃഷ്ണ ്റേഗത്റ്താട് ്റേർ്ᩐു്ᩦ ഒ്ᩐര ഏ്കർ ്റേവസവിം ഭൂമി് ൽ അമിനിേി ഹസന്റർ നിർ്ᩜി്കാൻ തിരുവിതാിംക്ൂർ ്റേവസവിം ്റ ാർഡ് അനുമതി നൽക്ി് രു്ᩐത് ഗപക്ാരിം പ്ധതി ഹേലവിന്ഹറ 50% തുക ാ്ി 2.47 ്റക്ാടി രൂപ ഗപവൃ്തി നിർവെണ ഏജൻസി്ിാ്ി തിരുവന്ᩌപുരിം ജി്ᩤാ ടൂറിസിം ഹഗപാ്റമാഷൻ ക്ൗൺസിൽ (ഡി.േി.പി.സി),്ക് അനുവേി്ചിരു്ᩐതാ്ിുിം പരാമർശിം (2) ഗപക്ാരിം . വി്റനാേസ്ᨸാര വക്ു്ᩔ് ഡ്ിറക്ടർ റി്റ്ᩔാർ്ᨾ് ഹേയ്തിരു്ᩐു (3). ്റേഗത സവ്ത് ്റേഗത്തിന്ഹറ്ിുിം ഭ്വരുഹട്ിുിം ഗപവർ്തന്ങൾ്ക് അ്ᩤാഹത മഹേഹ്ᩌ്ഝിലുിം ആവശയ്ങൾ്ക് ഉപ്റ്ിാ്ി്കരുഹത്ᩐ നിർ്റേശിം തിരുവിതാിംക്ൂർ ്റേവസവിം ്റ ാർഡിന് നൽക്ണഹമ്ᩐ് ആവശയഹ്ᩔ്ᨾ് ക്ഴ്കൂ്ᨾിം ക്ുള്ങര ഗശീക്ൃഷ്ണ സവാമി ്റേഗത ഉപ്റേശക് സമിതി െുമാനഹ്ᩔ്ᨾ ഹെ്റ്കാടതി് ൽ W.P.(C)22689/2017 ഫ്ിൽ ഹേയ്തിരു്ᩐു. ഈ സാെേരയ്തിൽ ്റമൽ പ്ധതി തുട്ങുവാൻ സാധി്കുക ി്ᩤാഹ്ി്ᩐുിം ആ്ിതിനാൽ, "പിൽഗ്ിിം ഹെറി്റേജ് സർക്യൂ്ᨾ് അേ് ക്ുള്ങര,ക്ഴ്കൂ്ᨾിം, തിരുവന്ᩌപുര" എ്ᩐ പ്ധതി റോ്കാനുിം തിരുവന്ᩌപുരിം ഡിടിപിസി്ക് അനുവേി്ച് അഡവാൻസ് തുക ാ്ി 2.47 ്റക്ാടി രൂപ പലിശ്ിുൾ്ᩔഹട തിരിഹക് പിടി്കു്ᩐതിനു്ᩦ അനുവാേിം നൽക്ണഹമ്ᩐുിം ഡ്ിറക്ടർ പരാമർശിം (2) ഗപക്ാരിം അഭയർ്ഥി്ചു. (4). സർ്കാർ ഇ്കാരയിം വിശേമാ് പരി്റശാധി്ചു. 2017 ൽ ഭരണാനുമതി നൽക്ുക ുിം ്റക്ാടതി വയവൊരിം മൂലിം നാളിതുവഹര്ിാ് ഗപവൃ്തി ആരിംഭി്കാൻ ക്ഴി്ിാ് ുമാ്ി " പിൽഗ്ിിം ഹെറി്റേജ് സർക്യൂ്ᨾ് അേ് ക്ുള്ങര, ക്ഴ്കൂ്ᨾിം,തിരുവന്ᩌപുരിം" എ്ᩐ പ്ധതി്ി ഭരണാനുമതി നൽക്ി്ി പരാമർശിം (1) -ഹല ഉ്തരവ് റേ് ഹേയ്തുിം, ടി പ്ധതി്കാ് അനുവേി്ച് അഡവാൻസ് തുക ാ്ി 2.47 ്റക്ാടി 10 W.P.(C) No.22689 of 2017 രൂപ പലിശ്ിുൾ്ᩔഹട തിരുവന്ᩌപുരിം ജി്ᩤാ ടൂറിസിം ഹഗപാ്റമാഷൻ ക്ൗൺസിൽ (ഡി.േി.പി.സി)സർ്കാരി്റല്ക് തിരി്ചട്ി ്ക്ᩂതാഹണ്ᩐുിം ഇതിനാൽ ഉ്തരവാക്ു്ᩐു.” 10. The learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board would also submit that since the Government has already cancelled administrative sanction for the project in question, the Board has no intention to proceed further with Ext.P1 order dated 22.02.2017. In such circumstances, recording the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is disposed of taking note of the decision taken by the 2[nd] respondent in the order dated 16.11.2022, whereby the administrative sanction granted for the project in question has already been cancelled and also the stand taken by the Travancore Devaswom Board that it has no intention to proceed further with Ext.P1 order dated 22.02.2017. Consequently, Ext.P1 order will stand set aside, for the aforesaid reason. ## **Sd/ANIL K.NARENDRAN JUDGE** ## **Sd/-** **P.G. AJITHKUMAR JUDGE** PV 11 W.P.(C) No.22689 of 2017 ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22689/2017`** ## **`PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS`** ``` Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE BOARD ORDER DTD. 22.2.2017 ``` ``` Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER RTI DTD. 20.4.17. ``` ``` Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY OF THE BOARD DTD. 26.4.17. ``` ``` Exhibit P4TRUE COPY OF THE LEAFLET ISSUED BY THE TOURISM & DEVASWOM MINISTER. ``` - **`Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LEAFLET ISSUED BY THE TOURISM DEPARTMENT.`** ``` Exhibit P6TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN O.P. NO. 37943/02. ``` - **`Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE AND ORDER OF IST RESPONDENT.`** - **`Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINTS PREFERRED BY PETITIONER.`** - **`Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF LAND SPECIAL OFFICER.`** ``` Exhibit P10TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION RECEIVED UNDER RTI. ``` - **`Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY VILLAGE OFFICER.`** - **`Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF 3RD RESPONDENT.`** ``` Exhibit P13TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 4.5.2017 WITH THE ESTIMATE ISSUED BY ENGINEER OF THE IST RESPONDENT. ``` 12 ## W.P.(C) No.22689 of 2017 ## **`RESPONDENTs’ EXHIBITS`** - **`Exhibit R1 A TRUE COPY OF THE DRAFT MOU.`** - **`Annexure R1 B TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY LAND SPECIAL OFFICER ON 29.11.2018 BEFORE THE BOARD.`** - **`Annexure R1 C TRUE COPY OF THE A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18.12.1955 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF TRAVANCORE COCHIN.`** - **`Annexure R1 D`** - **`TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH PRODUCED BY HE LAND SPECIAL OFFICER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD.`** - **`Exhibit R2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.03.2017 GRANTING ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTION FOR THE PROJECT.`** - **`Exhibit R2 B TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA AND DISTRICT TOURISM PROMOTION COUNCIL DATED 29.03.2017.`** - **`Exhibit R2 C TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.03.2017.`** - **`Exhibit R2 D TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22.02.2017.`** - **`Exhibit R2 E TRUE COPY OF THE PROJECT REPORT OF THE PILGRIM HERITAGE CIRCUIT.`** - **`Exhibit R4 A THE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT REGISTER FILE NO. BII 11074/17 DATED 18.9.2017 TR5 RECEIPT NO. 6742/674161 ISSUED BY THE TECHNICAL ASSISTANT, CENTRAL SURVEY OFFICE, TRIVANDRUM -14.`**