Mattannur Sree Mahadeva Temple v. State of Kerala and Others

W.P.(C)No.31729 of 2023 1 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN** ## **&** **THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS** **TUESDAY, THE 3[RD] DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 11TH ASWINA, 1945** ## **W.P.(C)NO.31729 OF 2023** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **MATTANUR SREE MAHADEVA TEMPLE, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER P.O.MATTANUR, KANNUR -, PIN - 670702** **BY ADV MAHESH V RAMAKRISHNAN** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (DEVASWOM) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001** - **2 MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HOUSEFED COMPLEX, P.O. ERANHIPALAM, KOZHIKODE -, PIN - 673006** - **3 THE COMMISSIONER MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, HOUSEFED COMPLEX, P.O. ERANHIPALAM, KOZHIKODE -, PIN - 673006** - **4 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, THALASSERY DIVISION, P.O.THIRUVANGAD, THALASSERY, KANNUR -, PIN - 670102** - **5 AJAYAKUMAR E.K. LEEBA OFFSET PRINTERS, KAILAS AUDITORIUM, NEAR MATTANUR SREE MAHADEVA TEMPLE, P.O. MATTANNUR, KANNUR -, PIN - 670702** - **6 ANILKUMAR K. M.M. COMPUTER CENTRE, MAHADEVA HALL BUILDING, NEAR MATTANUR SREE MAHADEVA TEMPLE,** W.P.(C)No.31729 of 2023 2 ## **P.O.MATTANNUR, KANNUR -, PIN - 670702** - **7 DR.JITHIN,** - **SMILE LOUNGE DENTAL CLINIC & IMPLANT CENTRE, KAILAS AUDITORIUM, NEAR MATTANUR SREE MAHADEVA TEMPLE, P.O.MATTANNUR, KANNUR -, PIN - 670702** - **8 JAYANTH C.J** - **VAZHIPADU COUNTER BUILDING, NEAR MATTANUR SREE MAHADEVA TEMPLE, P.O.MATTANNUR, KANNUR -, PIN - 670702** - **9 VALSAN K** - **SREE SABARI TRAVELS, KAILAS AUDITORIUM, NEAR MATTANUR SREE MAHADEVA TEMPLE, P.O.MATTANNUR, KANNUR -, PIN - 670702** - **10 K.K. MURALEEDHARAN, HINDUSTAN ASSOCIATED TRADERS, KAILAS AUDITORIUM, NEAR MATTANUR SREE MAHADEVA TEMPLE, P.O.MATTANNUR, KANNUR -, PIN - 670702** - **11 SAROJINI,** - **W/O (LATE) K.P. RAMESHAN, PONACHADAN HOUSE, PULLAMBIL ROAD, CHIRAKKARA, THIRUVANGAD, THALASSERY, KANNUR -, PIN - 670104** - **12 K.V. JEEJA, MAHADEVA QUARTERS, NEAR MATTANUR SREE MAHADEVA TEMPLE, P.O.MATTANNUR, KANNUR -, PIN - 670702** - **13 MADHUSOODHANAN K** **REEM RESTAURANT, KAILAS AUDITORIUM, NEAR MATTANUR SREE MAHADEVA TEMPLE, P.O. MATTANNUR, KANNUR -, PIN - 670702** - **14 O.RAMACHANDRAN** **SHRINKHALA FURNITURE COLLECTIONS, KAILAS AUDITORIUM,NEAR MATTANUR SREE MAHADEVA TEMPLE, P.O.MATTANNUR, KANNUR -, PIN - 670702** **15 P.M.NARAYANAN NAMBIAR, MAMATHA BOOKS, KAILAS AUDITORIUM, NEAR MATTANUR SREE MAHADEVA TEMPLE, P.O.MATTANNUR, KANNUR -, PIN - 670702** - **16 RAJEESH BABU,** - **CHITHRATHARA LIGHTS & SOUNDS, MAHADEVA QUARTERS, NEAR MATTANUR SREE MAHADEVA TEMPLE, P.O.MATTANNUR, KANNUR -, PIN - 670702** - **17 SHAKHI PRASAD,** **JANASHREE DTP CENTRE, NEAR MATTANUR SREE MAHADEVA TEMPLE, P.O.MATTANNUR, KANNUR -, PIN - 670702** W.P.(C)No.31729 of 2023 3 - **18 K.P.SUDHEER, MAHADEVA QUARTERS,NEAR MATTANUR SREE MAHADEVA TEMPLE, P.O.MATTANNUR, KANNUR -, PIN – 670702** **19 SUDHISH P FITNESS CLINIC, MAHADEVA QUARTERS, NEAR MATTANUR SREE MAHADEVA TEMPLE, P.O.MATTANNUR, KANNUR -, PIN - 670702** - **20 SURENDRAN K** **MALABAR DIAGNOSTIC CENTRE, KAILAS AUDITORIUM, NEAR MATTANUR SREE MAHADEVA TEMPLE, P.O.MATTANNUR, KANNUR -, PIN - 670702** **21 SREE MAHADEVA KSHETHRA SAMITHI, MATTANNUR, REGD NO.27/1972, MATTANUR, IRITTY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, C.H.MOHANDAS, S/O LATE C.M.BALAKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, RESIDING AT SREENIKETH, MATTANUR KANNUR -, PIN - 670702** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** **SRI S.RAJMOHAN - SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER ; SRI R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN - STANDING COUNSEL- MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD** **ON 03.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C)No.31729 of 2023 4 ## **JUDGMENT** ## **Anil K. Narendran, J.** The petitioner, namely, Mattannur Sree Mahadeva Temple, is a controlled institution under the Malabar Devaswom Board. The petitioner through its Executive Officer has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 3[rd] respondent Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board to initiate immediate statutory proceedings against the 21[st] respondent - Sree Mahadeva Kshethra Samithi, Mattannur to recover the documents, if any, relating to letting out of the buildings owned by the temple to respondents 2 to 20, by invoking the provisions under the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951 and hand over those documents to the petitioner forthwith. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the 3[rd] respondent Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board to take appropriate steps to recover arrears of rent from respondents 5 to 20 along with interest on arrears at the rate of 12% per annum from the respective due dates till realisation and pay the same to the petitioner; a writ of mandamus commanding the 3[rd] respondent Commissioner to W.P.(C)No.31729 of 2023 5 take appropriate steps to recover vacant possession of the buildings in occupation of respondents 5 to 20; and a writ of mandamus commanding the 3[rd] respondent Commissioner to initiate appropriate proceedings to conduct public auction for letting out the buildings to ensure reasonable rental income to the petitioner, as per the current market rate, complying with the statutory formalities under Section 29 of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act and the Rules made thereunder, read with the directions issued by this Court in **T.** ## **Krishnakumar v. Cochin Devaswom Board [2022 (5) KHC SN 8 : 2022 (4) KLT 798]** . 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Senior Government Pleader for the 1[st] respondent State and also the learned Standing Counsel for Malabar Devaswom Board for respondents 2 to 4. Considering the nature of relief proposed to be granted, service of notice on respondents 5 to 21 is dispensed with. 3. Ext.P1 order dated 29.09.2021 of the 3[rd] respondent Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board in O.A.No.1 of 2020 declaring under Section 57(a) of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act that Mattannur Sree Mahadeva Temple is a religious institution as defined under Section 6(17) of W.P.(C)No.31729 of 2023 6 the said Act, with a direction to the Deputy Commissioner to frame a scheme for the administration of that temple, is under challenge in O.S.No.5 of 2022 pending before the Sub Court, Thalasserry, which is one filed by the 21[st] respondent Sree Mahadeva Kshethra Samithi, invoking the provisions under Section 62 of the said Act. The Kshethra Samithi filed the said suit during the pendency of W.P.(C)No.25444 of 2021, a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P2 order dated 08.10.2021 of the 3[rd] respondent Commissioner, appointing an Executive Officer for Mattannur Sree Mahadeva Temple and the notice dated 01.11.2021 of the Executive Officer issued to the Kshethra Samithi. 4. W.P.(C)No.25444 of 2021 was closed by Ext.P3 judgment dated 06.03.2023, taking note of the institution of O.S.No.5 of 2022 by the Kshethra Samithi before the Sub Court, Thalasserry, invoking the statutory remedy under Section 62 of the said Act. Paragraphs 2, 3 and also the last paragraph of that judgment read thus; ''2. Ext.P8 order is one passed by the 2[nd] respondent Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board under Section 57(a) of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951, declaring the temple as a religious institution envisaged under Section 6(17) of the said Act. W.P.(C)No.31729 of 2023 7 During the pendency of this writ petition, the petitioner challenged the aforesaid order by invoking the statutory remedy provided under Section 62 of the Act by instituting a civil suit before the Sub Court, Thalassery. The said suit is pending consideration. 3. Having considered the materials on record and also the submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for Malabar Devaswom Board and also the learned counsel for the 4[th] respondent, we are of the view that since the petitioner has already challenged Ext.P8 order by invoking the statutory remedy under Section 62 of the Act by approaching the Sub Court, this writ petition can be closed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to prosecute the said suit, raising appropriate legal and factual contentions. In such circumstances, this writ petition is closed; leaving open the legal and factual contentions raised by both sides, and without prejudice to the aforesaid right of the petitioner.'' 5. The documents marked as Exts.P5 to P20 are lawyer notices issued on behalf of the Executive Officer, Mattannur Sree Mahadeva Temple, to respondents 5 to 20, the tenants who are in occupation of the respective shop rooms in the buildings owned by Mattannur Sree Mahadeva Temple, calling upon them to remit the entire arrears of rent together with interest, within the time limit specified in those notices. Ext.P21 is a reply notice dated 14.02.2023 issued on behalf of respondents 5, 7, 9, 10, W.P.(C)No.31729 of 2023 8 14, 15 and 20, wherein it is stated that at the time of entrustment of the shop rooms, the Kshethra Samithi accepted security deposits from the tenants and the tenants have been regularly paying the rent to the Kshethra Samithi. Ext.P22 is a representation dated 18.07.2023 made by the Executive Officer, Mattannur Sree Mahadeva Temple, before the 3[rd] respondent Commissioner, requesting the Commissioner to initiate appropriate proceedings against the tenants, who are in occupation of the respective shop rooms in the buildings owned by Mattannur Sree Mahadeva Temple, without paying the monthly rent and for evicting the tenants, if found necessary, with police assistance. 6. The document marked as Ext.P24 is a communication dated 24.07.2023 of the 3[rd] respondent Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board, addressed to the Assistant Commissioners, including the 4[th] respondent Assistant Commissioner, Thalassery, calling for reports from the Trustees/Trustee Boards of the temples, which are controlled institutions under the Malabar Devaswom Board, about the amount spent towards the legal proceedings initiated against the tenants in occupation of Devaswom buildings. The document marked as Ext.P25 is a Government communication dated 20.06.2023 of the 1[st] W.P.(C)No.31729 of 2023 9 respondent, addressed to the Commissioner/Administrator of Devaswom Boards in the State, including the 3[rd] respondent Commissioner. The said letter reads thus; '' മ�ൽ വ�ഷയത�മ�യ � ത�ങള�ട� ശ�ദ കണ���ന�. ത�ര�വ�ത��ക�ർ മ�വസ!� മ"�ർഡ� ടകട��ങള�ട� വ��ക കര�ർ ��ഘനങൾ ത�യ�നത�ന� സ�ശ)��യ ന�യ� ന�ർമ�ണ� ന�മതണ�നത�ന�ട, ആവ�.കത സ�"ന�ച� ത�ര�വ�ത��ക�ർ മ�വസ!� മ"�ർഡ� ശ1സ�ഡന�,� "ഹ�. മ�വസ!� വക�പ� �ശ4�യ സ�ചന ശ1ക�ര� കത� സ�ർപ���കയ�ണ�യ�. �തസ�1നങള�� ടകട��ങള�� വസ8� വകകള�� വ��കയ � എ��ത�ട�ളളവര�ൽ ക���ശ�ക വര�ത�നവർട�ത�ടരയ�ള ന�യ� ന�1��കൾ മവ)ത�ൽ ത<ർപ���നത�ന� 1ഞ�"� സ�സ�നത� ഒര� ന�യ�� ന��വ���ണ�. ['The Punjab Religious Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act 1997']. 1ഞ�"� സ�സ�നത�ന�ട, ��ത?കയ�ൽ ഉളള ഒര� 1�ത�യ ന�യ�� 1�സ���നത�ന� മവണ അന�ക�� ന�1�� മകരള സർ��ര�ന�ട, ഭ�)ത� ന�ന�� ഉണ�കണട�ന� ത�ര�വ�ത��ക�ർ മ�വസ!� മ"�ർഡ� ശ1സ�ഡന�,� അഭ.ർത�ച�ര���ന�. മ�ൽ വ�ഷയ� വ�����യ� 1ര�മ��ധ���നത�ന� ത�ങള�ട� മ�വസ!� മ"�ർഡ�ന�ട, ന�യശ4ണത���ള ടകട��ങൾ വ��കയ എ��ത�ട�ളവര�ൽ ക���ശ�ക വര�ത�യവർ ട�ത�ടര ന�യ�ന�1��കൾ സ!<കര���നത�ന� കഴ�ഞ വർഷങള�ൽ ടച�വ�യ ത�കയ�ട� വ������ങൾ അ��യ4ര��യ� �ഭ.����വ�ൻ ത�ലJര.ടപ��ന�.'' 7. The issue that requires consideration in this writ petition is as to whether the petitioner is entitled to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the reliefs sought for in this writ petition. 8. In this writ petition, the petitioner is mainly seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 3[rd] respondent Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board to take appropriate W.P.(C)No.31729 of 2023 10 steps to recover arrears of rent from respondents 5 to 20, the tenants who are in occupation of the respective shop rooms in the buildings owned by Mattannur Sree Mahadeva Temple; to recover vacant possession of the buildings in occupation of respondents 5 to 20; to initiate appropriate proceedings to conduct public auction for letting out the buildings to ensure reasonable rental income to the petitioner, as per the current market rate, complying with the statutory formalities under Section 29 of the Act and the rules made thereunder, read with the directions issued by this Court in **T. Krishnakumar [2022** ## **(5) KHC SN 8]** . 9. 'Deva' means God and 'swom' means ownership in Sanskrit and the term 'Devaswom' denotes the property of God in common parlance. [See: **Prayar Gopalakrishnan and another v. State of Kerala and others** - **2018 (1) KHC 536]** 10. 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 W.P.(C)No.31729 of 2023 11 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 the best advantage. 11. 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, require 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 ‘fence 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. 12. In **Travancore Devaswom Board v. Mohanan Nair [(2013) 3 KLT 132]** a Division Bench of this Court noticed that W.P.(C)No.31729 of 2023 12 in **A.A. Gopalakrishnan [(2007) 7 SCC 482]** a Three-Judge Bench of the Apex Court emphasised that it is the duty of the courts to protect and safeguard the interest and properties of the religious and charitable institutions. The Division Bench further noticed that 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 is the guardian of the deity and apart from the revisional jurisdiction under Section 103 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963, the High Court has inherent jurisdiction and the doctrine of _parens patriae_ will also apply in exercising the jurisdiction. 13. Mattannur Sree Mahadeva Temple is a controlled institution under the Malabar Devaswom Board. As held in the decisions referred to supra, it is the duty of the trustees to be faithful to the Devaswom and manage, protect and safeguard the interests and properties of the Devaswom, with reasonable diligence. The Malabar Devaswom Board and its officials are duty-bound to exercise their supervisory control in order to ensure that the interests and properties of the Devaswom are protected and safeguarded by its trustees and the employees of the Devaswom. Any act of ‘fence eating the crops’ should be W.P.(C)No.31729 of 2023 13 ## dealt with sternly. 14. In **T. Krishnakumar v. Cochin Devaswom Board [(2022) 4 KLT 798]** a Division Bench of this Court in which one among us [Anil K. Narendran, J] was a party held that in view of the law laid down by this Court in **Abu K.S. v. Travancore Devaswom Board [2022 SCC OnLine Ker 1642: 2022:KER:6409]** , relying on the decision of the Apex Court in **M.V. Ramasubbiar v. Manicka Narasimachara [(1979) 2 SCC 65],** while leasing out the buildings owned by the Devaswoms, the Cochin Devaswom Board and its officials have to ensure that proper income is generated from the said buildings. In such transactions, the Board and its officials have to show reasonable diligence in the manner of an ordinary prudent man of business to conduct his own affairs. The action of the Board as a trustee cannot be equated to that of mere landlord. The best interest of the Devaswoms under the control of the Board would be subserved only if income is generated. 15. In **T. Krishnakumar [(2022) 4 KLT 798]** , the Division Bench noticed that the major source of revenue of the Cochin 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 W.P.(C)No.31729 of 2023 14 premises for various activities in connection with rituals and festivals in the temples and also the rental income generated from the buildings owned by the respective Devaswoms. Therefore, while dealing with the buildings owned by the Devaswoms, the Cochin Devaswom Board and its officials have to ensure that proper income is generated from the said building. In such transactions, the Board and its officials have to show reasonable diligence in the manner of an ordinary prudent man of business to conduct his own affairs, by ensuring that the lease rental or licence fee of the buildings owned by the Devaswoms is not lower than the prevailing market rent. The action of the Board in demanding lease rental or licence fee for the buildings owned by the Devaswoms taking into consideration the prevailing market rent cannot be termed as an action of the - Board demanding exhorbitant or rack rent, since, while leasing out the buildings owned by the Devaswoms, the Board and its officials have to ensure that proper income is generated from the said buildings. 16. In **Rajan P.N. and another v. State of Kerala and others [2023 SCC OnLine Ker 5089]** a Division Bench of this Court in which one among us [Anil K. Narendran, J] was a party held that the aforesaid principle in **T. Krishnakumar [(2022) 4** W.P.(C)No.31729 of 2023 15 **KLT 798]** is equally applicable in the case of properties, including lands owned by the Temples under the Malabar Devaswom Board. 17. In Ext.P25 communication dated 20.06.2023 of the 1[st] respondent State, which is addressed to the Commissioner/ Administrator of Devaswom Boards in the State, including the 3[rd] respondent Commissioner, reference has been made to Punjab Religious Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1997, enacted by the State Legislature for eviction of unauthorised occupants from religious premises and for certain incidental matters. Section 3 of the Act deals with unauthorised occupation of religious premises. 18. In **Harbhajan Singh v. State of Punjab [2020 (2) SCC 659]** , while repelling the challenge made against the constitutionality of the provisions under the Punjab Religious Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act 1997, the Apex Court relied on the decision in **Christ the King Cathedral v. John Ancheril [(2001) 6 SCC 170]** on the exemption notification under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 granting exemption in public interest to the buildings of all churches/mosques of all minority religions and of all Dioceses, Archdioceses, Monasteries, etc. W.P.(C)No.31729 of 2023 16 19. It is for the Trustee Board/Executive Officer of Mattannur Sree Mahadeva Temple to protect and safeguard the interests and properties of the Devaswom by initiating legal proceedings, in accordance with law, taking note of the law laid down in the decisions referred to supra, instead of approaching the 3[rd] respondent Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board by submitting representations like Ext.P22 seeking interference of the Commissioner for evicting the tenants in occupation. The petitioner is not entitled to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeing any such reliefs. 20. Another relief sought for in this writ petition is a writ of mandamus commanding the 3[rd] respondent Commissioner, to initiate statutory proceedings against the 21[st] respondent - Sree Mahadeva Kshethra Samithi, Mattannur to recover the documents, if any, relating to letting out of the buildings owned by the temple to respondents 2 to 20. 21. The pleadings and materials on record would not show that the petitioner has made any such request before the 3[rd] respondent Commissioner. It is for the petitioner to make a proper representation before the 3[rd] respondent for that purpose, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a W.P.(C)No.31729 of 2023 17 certified copy of this judgment, in which event, the 3[rd] respondent shall pass appropriate orders thereon, strictly in accordance with law, with notice to the petitioner and the 21[st] respondent Kshethra Samithi, and after affording them a reasonable opportunity to substantiate their contentions. The writ petition is disposed of as above. **Sd/ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE** **Sd/SOPHY THOMAS, JUDGE** Dxy W.P.(C)No.31729 of 2023 18 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 31729/2023** **PETITIONER EXHIBITS** **Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29-09-2021 IN OA NO.1/2020 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** **Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.J2/4597/2021/MDB DATED 08-10-2021 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** - **Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 06-032023 IN W.P.(C) NO. 25444/2021 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.** - **Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE MONTHLY INCOMEEXPENDITURE STATEMENT OF THE PETITIONER TEMPLE DURING JULY 2023** - **Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21-01-2023 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT.** - **Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21-01-2023 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 6TH RESPONDENT.** - **Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21-01-2023 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 7TH RESPONDENT.** - **Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21-01-2023 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 8TH RESPONDENT.** - **Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21-01-2023 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 9TH RESPONDENT.** - **Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21-01-2023 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 10TH RESPONDENT** - **Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21-01-2023 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 11TH RESPONDENT** - **Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21-01-2023 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 12TH RESPONDENT** - **Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21-01-2023 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 13TH RESPONDENT** W.P.(C)No.31729 of 2023 19 - **Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21-01-2023 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 14TH RESPONDENT** - **Exhibit P15 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21-01-2023 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 15TH RESPONDENT** - **Exhibit P16 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21-01-2023 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 16TH RESPONDENT** - **Exhibit P17 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21-01-2023 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 17TH RESPONDENT** - **Exhibit P18 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21-01-2023 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 18TH RESPONDENT** - **Exhibit P19 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21-01-2023 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 19TH RESPONDENT** - **Exhibit P20 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21-01-2023 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 20TH RESPONDENT** - **Exhibit P21 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE DATED 1402-2023 ISSUED BY SRI.A.P.MANOJ KUMAR, ADVOCATE ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS 5,7,9,10, 14, 15 AND 20 HEREIN TO THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER.** - **Exhibit P22 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 19-07-2023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT COMMISSIONER** - **Exhibit P23 TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DATED 21-07-2023 SIGNED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** - **Exhibit P24 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.J73834/2023/MDB DATED 24-07-2023 ISSUED TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.** - **Exhibit P25 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.DEVA3/3/2022-REV DATED 20-06-2023 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.**