P V Muraleedharan v. State of Kerala & Others

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANIL K. NARENDRAN`** ## **`&`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS`** ``` TUESDAY, THE 17[TH] DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 25TH ASWINA, 1945 ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 10406 OF 2023 ``` ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` P V MURALEEDHARAN, S/O.VASUDEVAN, AGED 61 YEARS RESIDING AT PRASADAM, ELAMKOOR P O, MANCHERY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676122 ``` ``` BY ADVS.C.RAJENDRAN B.K.GOPALAKRISHNAN R.S.SREEVIDYA ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - **`1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY REVENUE (DEVASWOM) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001`** - **`2 MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, HOUSEFED COMPLEX, ERANHIPALAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673006 REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY`** - **`3 THIRUMANDHAMKUNNU BHAGAVATHY TEMPLE ANGADIPPURAM, PERINTHALMANNA MALAPPURAM-673 321 REPRESENTED BY ITS TRUSTEE`** - **`*4 MANAGER, THIRUMANDHAMKUNNU BHAGAVATHY DEVASWAM, POST BOX NO.5, ANGADIPPURAM PO MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-673 321`** ``` (DESCRIPTION OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT IS SUO MOTU CORRECTED AS 'EXECUTIVE OFFICER', INSTEAD OF 'MANAGER' AS PER ORDER DATED 27-03-2023 IN WP(C) 10406/2023 ``` - **`5 CONVENOR, THIRUMANDHAMKUNNU BHAGAVATHY TEMPLE POORAM 2023 ORGANIZING COMMITTEE,`** 2 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 ``` THIRUMANDHAMKUNNU BHAGAVATHY TEMPLE, ANGADIPPURAM P O PERINTHALMANNA MALAPPURAM, PIN - 673321 ``` ``` BY ADVS.SRI.MAHESH V RAMAKRISHNAN SMT.ASWINI SANKAR R. S . SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI(K/962/1992) SRI.S.M.PRASANTH(K/957/1994) SRI.T.H.ARAVIND(K/000266/2017) SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.)(R-245) ``` ``` SRI S.RAJMOHAN - SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER ; SRI R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN - STANDING COUNSEL- MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 3 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 ## **JUDGMENT** Anil K. Narendran, J. The petitioner, who is a devotee of Thirumandhamkunnu Bhagavathy Temple, Angadippuram, which is a controlled institution under the Malabar Devaswom Board, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P1 notice of ‘Thirumandhamkunnu Pooram 2023’ and list of Pooram Committee published by the Devaswom Board with the members of the Muslim community. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 4 to delete the members from the Muslim community from 2023 Thirumandhamkunnu Bhagavathy Temple Pooram Committee. The further relief sought for is a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to constitute any committee for conducting Thirumandhamkunnu Bhagavathy Temple Pooram, festivals, etc. with the members of the Muslim community as well. 2. Going by the averments in the writ petition, the petitioner, who is the Secretary of Hindu Ikya Vedi and an ardent devotee of Thirumandhamkunnu Bhagavathy Temple, is aggrieved by the formation of festival committee in the aforesaid temple with persons from Muslim community in its important 4 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 posts. It is alleged in the writ petition that the said persons are also the leaders and members of a political party for Muslims, i.e., Muslim League and that immediately assuming charge, they made the temple to look as a mosque by painting it with the colour combination of the national flag of Pakisthan. 3. On 24.03.2023, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Senior Government Pleader took notice on admission for the 1[st] respondent. The learned Standing Counsel took notice on admission for the 2[nd] respondent. This Court issued urgent notice on admission by special messenger to respondents 3 to 5 returnable by 27.03.2023. The learned Standing Counsel was directed to get instructions and the writ petition was ordered to be listed along with W.P.(C)No.10154 of 2023 on 27.03.2023. 4. On 27.03.2023, when this writ petition came up for consideration along with W.P.(C)No.10154 of 2023, this Court heard the preliminary arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners in the respective writ petitions, the learned Senior Government Pleader, the learned Standing Counsel for Malabar Devaswom Board and also the learned counsel for the Executive Officer, Thirumandhamkunnu Bhagavathi Devaswom. In the order dated 27.03.2023, this Court noticed the argument 5 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 advanced by the learned counsel for the 4[th] respondent Executive Officer that the constitution of Pooram Committee for conducting the annual festival from 28.03.2023 till 07.04.2023 was based on a decision taken in the meeting convened in the temple premises on 06.12.2022. The brochure of Pooram Festival of 2023 was published in the first week of March itself. By the said order, the learned counsel for the 4[th] respondent was directed to make available for the perusal of this Court the files relating to the constitution of Pooram Committee and the conduct of Pooram Festival. 5. On 30.03.2023, this Court passed a detailed order in this writ petition and also in the connected matter, i.e., W.P.(C)No.10154 of 2023. In the said order it was made clear that in the absence of a committee consisting of the devotees, constituted under the provisions contained in Circular No. HRH5/8246/2006 dated 15.06.2007, the entire activities in connection with Pooram Festival of 2023 in Sree Thirumandhamkunnu Bhagavathy Temple shall be conducted by the temple administration and ‘Pooram-2023 Sangadaka Samithi’ cannot meddle with any such matters. 6. The 4[th] respondent Executive Officer of Thirumandhamkunnu Bhagavathi Devaswom has filed a counter 6 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 affidavit dated 28.03.2023. The 3[rd] respondent Thirumandhamkunnu Bhagavathi Temple represented by its Trustee has filed a counter affidavit dated 01.05.2023, wherein it is stated that the Pooram Festival was conducted from 28.03.2023 till 07.04.2023, without the interference of the Pooram Committee in Ext.P1 notice, in view of the objections raised by the devotees and the pendency of this writ petition. The learned Standing Counsel for the 2[nd] respondent Malabar Devaswom Board has filed an adoption memo to accept the counter affidavit filed in W.P.(C)No.10154 of 2023 as the counter affidavit filed in this writ petition as well. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Senior Government Pleader for the 1[st] respondent, the learned Standing Counsel for Malabar Devaswom Board for the 2[nd] respondent, the learned counsel for the 3[rd] respondent and also the learned counsel for the 4[th] respondent. 8. The Pooram Festival of 2023 in Sree Thirumandhamkunnu Bhagavathy Temple is from 28.03.2023 till 07.04.2023. Though the date of publication of Ext.P1 notice is not disclosed in the counter affidavit filed by the 4[th] respondent Executive Officer, the learned counsel for the 4[th] respondent would submit that it was one published on 08.03.2023. 7 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 W.P.(C)Nos.10154 of 2023 and 10406 of 2023 were filed before this Court on 20.03.2023 and 22.03.2023 respectively. 9. Section 14 of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951, deals with Temple Advisory Committee. As per sub-section (1) of Section 14, for the purpose of ensuring the adequate participation of Hindu devotees, a committee may be constituted for each temple in the name "(name of the temple) Temple Advisory Committee", not inconsistent with the existing custom and practices. As per subsection (2) of Section 14, the Temple Advisory Committees formed under sub-section (1) shall be approved by the Board. As per sub-section (2) of Section 14, the composition of a Temple Advisory Committee under sub-section (1) shall be in such manner as may be prescribed. 10. In **Payyannur Sree Subrahmanya Swami Kshethrodharana Samithi and another v. Malabar** **Devaswom Board and other [2013 (3) KHC 849]** a Division Bench of this Court was dealing with the challenge made against Section 14 of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951 as substituted by Amending Act 31 of 2008, the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (Amendment) Rules, 2009 inserting 'the Rules under Section 8 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 14(3)' and Circular No. HRJ 1-5144/2009 dated 03.08.2009 issued by the Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board. This Court held that the object sought to be achieved by the constitution of Temple Advisory Committees provided in the opening part of sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the Act is for ensuring the adequate participation of Hindu devotees. While sub-section (1) of Section 14 provides for the participation of Hindu devotees, Rule 2 provides for nomination from among locally residing Hindu persons having interest in the affairs of the temple. The impugned Section 14 and the impugned Rules are so made that they insulate the maintenance of existing customs and practices of each temple. The constitution of a Temple Advisory Committee shall not be inconsistent with the existing customs and practices. This is the dictate of sub-section (1) of Section 14. 11. The Division Bench noticed that the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act and the Rules, including the impugned amendments to the Act and Rules, are made in such a manner that the administration of the institution by the hereditary trustee or the trustees is never intended to be impaired, except in cases where it becomes necessary to remove the hereditary trustee or the trustees or appoint non-hereditary 9 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 trustees or to frame a scheme for the purpose of the temple in question. Insofar as involvement in a Temple Advisory Committee under the impugned Rules and Section 14 of the Act is concerned, one has to be not merely a Hindu but a Hindu person having interest in the affairs of the temple, thereby meaning that such person should be one who would fall within the definition of the term 'person having interest' in Section 6(11)(b) of the Act. This means that only a person, who is entitled to attend at or is in the habit of attending the performance of worship or service in the temple, or who is entitled to partake or is in the habit of partaking in the benefit of the distribution of gifts thereat, can be included as a member of a Temple Advisory Committee. The scheme of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder not only insulates the authority of the hereditary trustee or the trustees to preserve and have matters of religion in a temple in terms of such customs, practices and usages, it gives no room for any authority to interfere with that. The statutory prescription to visit and remove or modify the office of a trustee is itself circumscribed to the effect that such exercise could be only to ensure the management in terms of the customs and practices. It is not to obviate or to be in derogation thereof. Such being the statutory situs and setting of the 10 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 impugned Section 14 of the Act and the impugned Rules, the Division Bench found no ground to hold that those provisions are unconstitutional. Equally, on the face of sub-section (3) of Section 14 of the Act and the general rule-making power, as contained in Section 100 of the Act, the Division Bench repelled the challenge to the impugned Rules that it is in excess of the rule-making power under the Act. 11.1. The Division Bench noticed that unlike the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950, and the manner of management of the different temples falling under the Travancore Devaswom Board and the Cochin Devaswom Board; insofar as the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act is concerned, many of the temples are autonomous bodies administered in terms of the schemes framed either by the Deputy Commissioner or earlier by the District Court and the control of the Malabar Devaswom Board over such institutions in terms of the provisions of the Madras Act is only supervisory. Even in relation to temples where a scheme is not framed, but the establishment continues to be under the control of a hereditary trustee or trustees, the legal status of that institution does not become anything different. With this in view, the Division Bench considered the plea that the 11 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 terms of the circular are in excess of the authority and sweep of Section 14 of the Act and the impugned Rules and it has been issued beyond the authority of the Commissioner. 11.2. The Division Bench noticed that Section 8B of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, which empowers the Malabar Devaswom Board to assume the direct management of any religious institution provided the trustees request the Board to take over its management unconditionally. Except in cases where direct administration is so assumed, the statutory authority under the Madras Act would remain regulatory and supervisory to the entire extent as provided by the different provisions of that Act. Reverting to the impugned circular, the Division Bench found that the provisions thereof, if operated, would be a parallel administrative mechanism whereby the matters relating to different aspects of the temple, including festivals, etc., would essentially be under the control of such Temple Advisory Committees. Recalling sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the Act, it is clear that the Statute never contemplated any such authority with the Temple Advisory Committees. The provision was only intended to ensure adequate participation of Hindu devotees, not inconsistent with the existing customs and practices. The purpose of the 12 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 participation of Hindu devotees as envisioned in sub-section (1) of Section 14 cannot be to create a managerial institution or a committee which will meddle with the affairs relating to the administration of the temple or any matter related thereto. Matters relating to customs, usages and practices include matters relating to festivals and organising different functions in connection with the rituals of the temple. Those are not matters which can be meddled with by the Temple Advisory Committees. The administration of the temple is clearly with the hereditary trustee or the trustees, as the case may be, except in cases of institutions which fall under Section 8B of the Act and of course those temples in relation to which the non-hereditary trustees or fit persons have been appointed. Going by sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the Act, read with Rule 2 of the impugned Rules, the Temple Advisory Committees would merely be a committee of persons having interest in the affairs of a temple, to ensure the adequate participation of Hindu devotees. Nothing beyond. 11.3. On the question as to whether the powers of the Commissioner to issue circulars include the power to issue any circular of the nature of the one impugned, the Division Bench noticed that the impugned circular does not quote any statutory authority. It merely refers to decision No.3 taken by the Board 13 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 on 09.07.2009. Section 14 of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act provides for Temple Advisory Committees and enjoins that the composition of a Temple Advisory Committee shall be in such manner as may be prescribed. The impugned Rules prescribe for nominations by the Malabar Devaswom Board. Such nominations are for members at clauses (c) to (e) of Rule 1 of the impugned Rules. While the power to prescribe the composition of a Temple Advisory Committee is left by the Act to be in terms of what may be prescribed, that Statute does not provide subordinate legislative power or regulatory executive authority to enumerate the powers, duties and functions of Temple Advisory Committees. The nature of duties and responsibilities fixed on the Chairman, Secretary and Treasurer under the impugned circular essentially give them the authority to take donations from the public, issue receipts, maintain bank accounts and get involved in different other aspects which are predominantly matters relating to the management of any establishment, whether it is religious or not. No such authority is seen available to a Temple Advisory Committee in terms of Section 14 of the Act or the impugned Rules. The insulation of the temple, its customs, usages, office of hereditary trustee or trustees from interference by the Temple 14 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 Advisory Committees is one of the grounds on which the validity of Section 14 and the impugned Rules have been upheld hereinabove. The provisions in the impugned circular essentially run to the contrary; by enabling the Temple Advisory Committees to make recommendations to the temple authorities in matters relating to temple festivals, renovations, naveekaranakalasam and other special chatangukal (ritualistic functions) which have to be held from time to time. What has been done by the impugned circular is essentially to take away what stands protected in terms of the different statutory provisions as regards the office of the hereditary trustee or the trustees and their eligibility to regulate the customs, usages and practices and rituals in the temples. Therefore, the impugned circular invades the right of the hereditary trustee or the trustees to manage and administer a temple unless found in statutory proceedings to be liable to be removed from such office. The Division Bench noticed that the manner in which nominations are to be made to the Temple Advisory Committees in terms of the impugned circular also tends to indicate that the criticism levelled by the petitioners, that the attempt is to infuse persons of the political choice of those in power, comments acceptance. The impugned circular goes beyond the limits of the provisions of 15 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 Section 14 of the Act and the impugned Rules, as noted above. Under such circumstances, the Division Bench held that the impugned circular is ultra vires the Act and the impugned Rules, therefore, arbitrary and liable to be declared as void and inoperative. The Division Bench allowed the writ petitions in part, quashing the impugned circular dated 03.08.2009 issued by the Commissioner of Malabar Devaswom Board. 12. After the decision of the Division Bench in **Payyannur Sree Subrahmanya Swami Kshethrodharana Samithi [2013 (3) KHC 849]** quashing the impugned circular dated 03.08.2009, the formation of committees consisting of the devotees in temples which are controlled institutions of Malabar Devaswom Board, for the specific purpose of conducting festivals or renovation works are governed by the provisions contained in Circular No. HRH5/8246/2006 dated 15.06.2007 issued by the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Institutions (Administration) Department. Clause (1) of the said circular reads thus; 1) ്ഷേത്ര്ങളിൽ ഉ്഼വാ്ഷ ാഷ്ങൾ, നവീകരണ ത്രവർ്ᩈന്ങൾ എ്ᩐിവ ന്ᩤരീരിയിൽ നട്ᩈു്ᩐരിനായി ആവശ്യമെ്ഝിൽ ഭ്ജന്മള ഉൾമെടു്ിമകാ് ക്്ി രൂരീകരികാവു്രാണ `.` ഇ്ങമന രൂരീകരികു്ᩐ ക്ᩜ്റികൾ ്ഷേത്ര്ᩈിൽ യാമരാരു കാരണവശ്ാലുും ്ᩝിരൊയി ത്രവർ്ᩈികാൻ രാടു്ᩦര്ᩤ `.` ഒരു വർഷ്ഷ്ᩈ്ഷകാ അമ്ᩤ്ഝിൽ 16 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 ഉ്ഷേശ്യലേയ്ങൾ രൂർ്ᩈീകരി്ചരിനു്ഷശ്ഷ്ഷൊ അമ്ᩤ്ഝിൽ ക്ᩜ്റിയുമട ത്രവർ്ᩈനും അവസാനിെികു്ᩐരിന് വകുെ് ക്ᩜീഷണർ ഉ്ᩈരവ് രുറമെടുവികുക്ഷയാ മെ്യു്ᩐരുവമര ഇരിൽ ഏരാണ് ആദ്യും വരിക, അര് കഴി്ᨼാൽ ക്ᩜ്റി രിരി്ചുവി്ഷട്ᩂരാണ് `.”` (underline supplied) 13. As held by the Division Bench in **Payyannur Sree** ## **Subrahmanya Swami Kshethrodharana Samithi [2013 (3)** **KHC 849]** the scheme of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act and the Rules framed thereunder not only insulates the authority of the hereditary trustee or the trustees to preserve and have matters of religion in a temple in terms of such customs, practices and usages, it gives no room for any authority to interfere with that. Matters relating to customs, usages and practices include matters relating to festivals and organising different functions in connection with the rituals of the temple. Those are not matters which can be meddled with even by a committee consisting of the devotees, constituted under the provisions contained in Circular No. HRH5/8246/2006 dated 15.06.2007, for the specific purpose of conducting temple festivals. The administration of the temple is clearly with the hereditary trustee or the trustees, as the case may be, except in cases of institutions which fall under Section 8B of the Act and of course those temples in relation to which 17 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 the non-hereditary trustees or fit persons have been appointed. 14. The stand taken by the 4[th] respondent Executive Officer in paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit dated 28.03.2023 is that, in the meeting convened in the premises of Sree Thirumandhamkunnu Bhagavathy Temple on 27.02.2023, an organising committee was constituted, which is not for the purpose of conducting the festival. The festival is being conducted directly by the temple. Since Pooram Festival is to be held for 12 days and thousands of worshipers and general public visit the temple every day and participate in Prasada Oottu, it is highly necessary to get assistance from the general public. It was with such an idea that a committee was constituted by including people's representatives, i.e., the Member of Parliament, the Member of Legislative Assembly, etc. The said committee was formed only to give necessary assistance, as and when required, to the temple administration in the conduct of festival and they have absolutely no involvement or control in the conduct of the festival or financial matters relating to the same. The rites and ceremonies to be performed as part of the Pooram Festival are in the absolute control of the Tantri and the same are being performed, as decided and instructed by the Tantri. 18 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 15. In the order dated 30.03.2023, this Court noticed the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel for Malabar Devaswom Board that ‘Pooram-2023 Sangadaka Samithi’ constituted, as evidenced by Ext.P1, is only an ‘ornamental committee’ to ensure public participation in Pooram Festival of 2023 in Sree Thirumandhamkunnu Bhagavathy Temple. The learned Standing Counsel could not offer any explanation for constituting such a committee in Sree Thirumandhamkunnu Bhagavathy Temple, instead of a committee consisting of the devotees, under the provisions contained in Circular No. HRH5/8246/2006 dated 15.06.2007, for the purpose of conducting Pooram Festival. The learned counsel, who entered appearance for the 5[th] respondent hereditary trustee, submitted ‘ - that the hereditary trustee is against the constitution of Pooram 2023 Sangadaka Samithi’. 16. Admittedly, the administration of Sree Thirumandhamkunnu Bhagavathy Temple is with the sole hereditary trustee, who is arrayed as the 5[th] respondent in W.P.(C)No.10154 of 2023, who is duty bound to preserve and have matters of religion in the temple in terms of such customs, practices and usages. Matters relating to customs, usages and practices include matters relating to festivals and organising 19 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 different functions in connection with the rituals of the temple. As held by this Court in the order dated 30.03.2023 [ **Hindu Seva Kendram v. State of Kerala - 2023 (3) KHC 258** ] a - committee like ‘Pooram 2023 Sangadaka Samithi’ constituted, as evidenced by Ext.P1, cannot meddle with such matters in the administration of Sree Thirumandhamkunnu Bhagavathy Temple by the hereditary trustee. As made clear in the said order, in the absence of a committee consisting of the devotees, constituted under the provisions contained in Circular No.HRH5/8246/2006 dated 15.06.2007, the entire activities in connection with Pooram Festival of 2023 in Sree Thirumandhamkunnu Bhagavathy Temple shall be conducted by the temple administration and ‘Pooram-2023 Sangadaka Samithi’ cannot meddle with any such matters. 17. In the order dated 30.03.2023, this Court has already dealt with the contention raised by the learned counsel for the 4[th] respondent on the question of maintainability of this writ petition. Paragraphs 18 and 19 of that order read thus; “18. The learned counsel for the 4[th] respondent would point out the statutory remedy available under Section 18 of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act and also that under Section 99 of the said Act, in case the petitioner in the respective writ petitions has any grievance 20 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 against the constitution of any committee for the conduct of Pooram Festival of 2023 in Sree Thirumandhamkunnu Bhagavathy Temple. When the constitution of ‘Pooram-2023 Sangadaka Samithi’ is in flagrant violation of the provisions contained in Circular No. HRH5/8246/2006 dated 15.06.2007 and also the principles laid down in the decision of this Court in **Payyannur Sree Subrahmanya Swami Kshethrodharana Samithi [2013 (3) KHC 849]** we find no merits in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the 4[th] respondent on the maintainability of these writ petitions. 19. In **Travancore Devaswom Board v. Mohanan Nair [(2013) 3 KLT 132]** a Division Bench of this Court noticed that in **A.A. Gopalakrishnan v. Cochin Devaswom Board [(2007) 7 SCC 482]** 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 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 _parens patriae_ will also apply in exercising the jurisdiction.” In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board to ensure strict compliance of the provisions contained in Circular No.HRH5/8246/2006 dated 15.06.2007 in the conduct of temple 21 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 festivals in temples which are controlled institutions under the Malabar Devaswom Board, in case the hereditary trustee or trustees, as the case may be, of the respective temple decides to constitute a committee to render necessary assistance to the temple administration for conducting temple festival. Sd/- **ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE** Sd/- **SOPHY THOMAS, JUDGE** AV 22 W.P.(C)No.10406 of 2023 ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10406/2023`** ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS ``` ``` Exhibit P1 ``` ``` A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE NOTICE OF "THIRUNANDHAMKUNNU POORAM 2023" AND LIST OF POORAM COMMITTEE PUBLISHED BY THE DEVASWOM BOARD WITH THE MEMBERS OF THE MUSLIM COMMUNITY ``` ``` Exhibit P2 A TRUE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE THIRUNANDHAMKUNNU BHAGAVATHY TEMPLE BUILDING PAINTED GREEN COLOUR ```