KOODALMANIKYAM DEVASWOM- COMPLAINT AGAINST THE FLEX BOARDS INSTALLED NEAR THE TEMPLE PREMISES AND REQUEST FOR RENOVATING THE KOODALMANIKYAM TEMPLE

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN ``` ``` & ``` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.GIRISH ``` ``` THURSDAY, THE 14[TH] DAY OF DECEMBER 2023/23RD AGRAHAYANA, 1945 ``` ``` DBP NO.114 OF 2023 ``` ``` KOODALMANIKYAM DEVASWOM- COMPLAINT AGAINST THE FLEX BOARDS INSTALLED NEAR THE TEMPLE PREMISES AND REQUEST FOR RENOVATING THE KOODALMANIKYAM TEMPLE ``` ``` PETITIONER: ``` ``` SUO MOTU ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** ``` 1STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (DEVASWOM)DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001 2THE COMMISSIONER KOODALMANIKYAM DEVASWOM, DEVASWOM DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695001 ``` ``` 3KOODALMANIKYAM DEVASWOM MANAGING COMMITTEE IRINJALAKUDA P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT, KOODALMANIKYAM DEVASWOM, IRINJALAKUDA, PIN 680121, REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR ``` ``` 4IRINJALAKUDA MUNICIPALITY IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, 680121. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY. ``` ``` 2 ``` DBP No.114 of 2023 ``` K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI (SR.)(C-41) ``` ``` SRI S.RAJMOHAN - SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER ; SRI SUJIN S- STANDING COUNSEL- KOODALMANIKKYAM DEVASWOM MANAGING COMMITTEE ``` ``` AMBILY.S – STANDING COUNSEL ``` ``` THIS DEVASWOM BOARD PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` 3 ``` DBP No.114 of 2023 ## **ORDER** ## **Anil K. Narendran, J.** This DBP is registered _suo motu_ , based on the complaint dated 26.09.2023 (File No.HCKL/8390/2023-DI-4) made by a devotee by name, Pradeepkumar raising complaints about installation of flex boards near Koodalmanikyam Temple and for renovation of the temple structures. 2. On 13.11.2023, when this DBP came up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel for Irinjalakkuda Municipality submitted that one flex board erected near the temple premises, on the public road in the front of the temple, has already been removed on 12.11.2023. The learned Standing Counsel for Koodalmanikyam Devaswom sought time to get instructions and accordingly, the matter was adjourned. 3. On 20.11.2023, the learned Standing Counsel for Irinjalakkuda Municipality submitted that at present there is no flex board on the public road in front of Koodalmanikyam Temple. 4. Heard the learned Senior Government Pleader for the 1[st] respondent, the learned Standing Counsel for Koodalmanikyam Devaswom for respondents 2 and 3 and also the learned Standing Counsel for Irinjalakkuda Municipality. ``` 4 ``` DBP No.114 of 2023 5. In view of the provisions under Section 3 of Koodalmanikyam Devaswom Act, 2005 the administration, control and management of Koodalmanikyam Temple at Irinjalakuda, its properties and endowments and the subordinate temples attached thereto shall be vested in Koodalmanikyam Devaswom Managing Committee, which shall be a body corporate having perpetual succession and a common seal and shall by the said name sue and be sued, through the Administrator. 6. Section 10 of the Act deals with duties of the Committee. As per Section 10, subject to the provisions of the Act and the rules made thereunder, it shall be the duty of the Committee, (a) subject to the custom and usage in the Temple, to arrange for the proper performance of the rites and ceremonies in the Temple and the subordinate temples attached thereto in accordance with the pathivu or scale of expenditure fixed for the Temple and the subordinate temples under Section 20 or, till the pathivu or scale of expenditure is fixed under that section in accordance with the pathivu or scale of expenditure specified in Schedule 1 of the Koodalmanikyam Devaswom Act, 1971; (b) to provide facilities to the worshippers for the proper performance of worship; (c) to ensure the safe custody of the ``` 5 ``` DBP No.114 of 2023 funds, valuable securities and jewellery and the preservation and management of the properties vested in the Temple; (d) to ensure maintenance of order and discipline and proper hygienic conditions in the temple and the subordinate temples attached thereto and to maintain the proper standard of cleanliness and purity in the offerings performed within the temple; (e) to ensure that the funds of the endowments of the Temple are spent according to the known wishes of the donors; (f) to make provisions for the payment of suitable emoluments to the salaried staff of the Devaswom; (g) to do all such things as may be incidental and conducive to the efficient management of the affairs of the Devaswom and for the facilities of the worshippers. 7. In **C.S.S. Motor Service v. Madras State [AIR 1953 Madras 279]** a Division Bench of the Madras High Court held that all public streets and roads vest in the State, but that the State holds them as trustee on behalf of the public. The members of the public are entitled as beneficiaries to use them as a matter of right and this right is limited only by the similar rights possessed by every other citizen to use the pathways. The State as trustees on behalf of the public is entitled to impose all such limitations on the character and extent of the ``` 6 ``` DBP No.114 of 2023 user as may be requisite for protecting the rights of the public generally. 8. In **Saghir Ahmad v. State of U.P. [AIR 1954 SC 728]** a Constitution Bench of the Apex Court agreed with the statement of law made by the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in Para.24 of the decision in **C.S.S. Motor Service [AIR 1953 Madras 279]** . 9. In **Sodan Singh v. New Delhi Municipal Committee [(1989) 4 SCC 155]** a Constitution Bench of the Apex Court held that the primary object of building roads is undoubtedly to facilitate people to travel from one point to another. 10. In **Suo Motu v. Travancore Devaswom Board and others [2021:KER:46194 : 2021 SCC OnLine Ker.** **13182]** - order dated 16.11.2021 in SSCR No.9 of 2021 - a Division Bench of this Court, in which both of us were parties, noticed that despite the enactment of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, 2011 by the State Legislature, the law laid down by the Apex Court in **Union** **of India v. State of Gujarat** [orders in SLP(Civil)No.8519 of 2006] and the law laid down by this Court in **Centre for** **Consumer Education v. State of Kerala [2019 (3) KHC** ``` 7 ``` DBP No.114 of 2023 **957]** , **Shani Johnson v. Kochi Corporation [2019 (3) KHC** **928]** , **Shali v. State of Kerala [2019 (5) KHC 118]** , **Kottamom (Kottiyar Mangalam) Sri. Darmasastha Temple Advisory Committee v. State of Kerala [2019 (5) KHC SN** **27 : 2019/KER/48273]** , **Sivaprasad v. State of Kerala [2020 (6) KHC 373]** , the State of Kerala and the law enforcement machinery have not taken necessary steps to ensure strict enforcement of the relevant statutory provisions and also the Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities formulated by Indian Roads congress (IRC:103-2012), in order to prevent encroachment of any nature, in any form, either temporary or permanent, on the right of way or on the pedestrian facilities on public roads, since any such encroachment will adversely affect the mobility and safety of all pedestrians including those with disabilities and reduced mobility. 11. In **Suo Motu v. Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee and others [2022 (6) KLT 849]** a Division Bench of this Court held that a ‘worshipper’, who shows reverence and adoration for Lord Guruvayoorappan, is duty bound to exercise his right to worship in an accustomed manner and subject to the practice and tradition in the temple. A worshipper of Lord Guruvayoorappan or a group of worshippers who offer Vilakku ``` 8 ``` DBP No.114 of 2023 Vazhipadu during Guruvayur Ekadashi cannot erect flex boards in the Nadappanthal or in the premises of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple. Therefore, the 2[nd] respondent Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee cannot permit a worshipper or a group of worshippers, who offer Vazhipadu in Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, to erect flex boards in the Nadappanthal or in the premises of the temple. The 2[nd] respondent Managing Committee and the Administrator of Guruvayur Devaswom shall ensure that no such incidents are repeated in Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple in future. 12. In view of the law laid down in the decisions referred to supra it is for the 4[th] respondent Irinjalakkuda Municipality to take necessary steps to ensure that there is no flex boards on the public road in front of the Koodalmanikyam Temple and that there is no encroachment of any nature, in any form, either temporary or permanent, on the right of way or on the pedestrian facilities on the public roads in front of Koodalmanikyam Temple, since any such encroachment will adversely affect the mobility and safety of pedestrians, including those with disabilities and reduced mobility. 13. In the complaint dated 29.06.2023 the complainant has also pointed out that some of the temple structures ``` 9 ``` DBP No.114 of 2023 requires immediate repair and renovation. The learned Standing Counsel for Koodalmanikyam Devaswom Managing Committee would point out the pendency of WP(C) No.9586 of 2023 filed by a devotee by name Ranjith K. Balakrishnan and two others in which one of the issues raised is lack of repair to the temple structures of Koodalmanikyam Temple. In such circumstances this DBP is disposed of with the directions contained hereinbefore at paragraph 12. **Sd/-** **Sd/-** **G. GIRISH, JUDGE** vgd