Sreedharan Namboothiri v. Travancore Devaswom Board & Others

1 W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2013 & W.P.(C)No.26034 of 2019 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANIL K. NARENDRAN** ## **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR** **WEDNESDAY, THE 24[TH] DAY OF MAY 2023 / 3RD JYAISHTA, 1945 W.P.(C)NO.29797 OF 2013** ## **PETITIONER:** **SREEDHARAN NAMBOOTHIRI, AGED 60 YEARS S/O.T N VISHNU NAMBOODIRI, R/A.T C 40/806 , AMBALAMUKKU, SREEVARAHAM, MANAKKAD P O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM** **BY ADVS. SRI.R.S.KALKURA SRI.HARISH GOPINATH SRI.M.S.KALESH SMT.A.V.PRIYA** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD REP BY ITS SECRETARY, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-11** - **2 THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-11** - **3 RUDRARU NARAYANARU ATHAYAR MADHOM VANCHIYOOR, TRIVANDRUM-695035** - **4 NARAYANARU RAMARU T C 271120, AMBA NAGAR, VACHIYOOR PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695035 BY ADVS.SRI.C.K.PAVITHRAN, SC, TDB SRI.A.N.RAJAN BABU, SC, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD SRI.T.K.AJITH KUMAR, SC, TDB** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.05.2023, ALONG WITH WP(C).26034/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** 2 W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2013 & W.P.(C)No.26034 of 2019 **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANIL K. NARENDRAN** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR** **WEDNESDAY, THE 24[TH] DAY OF MAY 2023 / 3RD JYAISHTA, 1945 W.P.(C)NO.26034 OF 2019** ## **PETITIONER:** **SREEDHARAN NAMBOOTHIRI, AGED 68 YEARS S/O. KRISHNAN NAMBOOTHIRI, AMBALAM, T.C. 40/806, SREEVARAHAM, MANACAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 009. (THE PETITIONER IS NOMINATED FOR PERFORMING THE TANTRIC DUTIES OF MANACAUD, ARYASALA AND CHENTHITTA DEVASWOMS) BY ADV D.AJITHKUMAR** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NANTHANCODE, NANTHANCODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003.** - **2 SECRETARY,TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANTHANCODE, NANTHANCODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003.** - **3 DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANTHANCODE, NANTHANCODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003.** - **4 ASSISTATN DEVAWOM COMMISSIONER THIRUVANANTHAPURAM GROUP, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, FORT P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 023.** - **5 RUDRA NARAYANARU, ATHIYAR MADAM, VANCHIYOOR P.O., THIRUVANNATHAPURAM - 695 035.** - **6 NARAYANARU RAMARU, ATHIUYAR MADAM, VANCHIYOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 035. BY ADV SRI.C.K.PAVITHRAN, SC, TDB** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.05.2023, ALONG WITH WP(C).29797/2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** 3 W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2013 & W.P.(C)No.26034 of 2019 ## **JUDGMENT** ## **Anil K. Narendran, J.** The petitioner in these writ petitions is claiming the right to perform Tantric rites and duties at Manacaud Devaswom, which is under the management of the 1[st] respondent Travancore Devaswom Board. Since a common issue is raised, these writ petitions are heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment. 2. W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2013:- The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P4 proceedings dated 29.08.2013 of the 1[st] respondent Travancore Devaswom Board, whereby the petitioner was informed that based on the request made by the Tantri of Athiyara Madom, the Board has decided to give back the right to perform Tantric rites and duties at Manacaud Devaswom to Athiyara Madom, which was temporarily given to the petitioner vide Board order dated 28.10.2003, on account of the death of the Chief Tantri of Athiyara Madom. Therefore, the petitioner was informed that, after the issuance of Ext.P4 order the Tantri of Athiyara Madom will perform Tantric rites and duties at Manacaud Devaswom. Sri Rudraru Narayanaru of Athiyara Madom, the 3[rd] respondent herein, had earlier issued 4 W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2013 & W.P.(C)No.26034 of 2019 Ext.P1 consent letter dated 10.06.2003 in favour of the petitioner for performing Tantric rites and duties at Aryasala, Chenthitta and Manacaud Devaswoms. The 2[nd] respondent Devaswom Commissioner had issued Ext.P2 communication dated 09.11.2006, whereby the petitioner was informed that vide Board order dated 28.10.2003 the petitioner has been permitted to perform Tantric rites and duties at Aryasala, Chenthitta and Manacaud Devaswoms until further orders. When the petitioner came to know that there is an attempt to take away his right to perform Tantric rites and duties at Manacaud Devaswom, he submitted Ext.P3 representation dated 05.07.2013 before the 2[nd] respondent Devaswom Commissioner. After the issuance of Ext.P4 order dated 29.08.2013 of the 1[st] respondent Board, the 3[rd] respondent Rudraru Narayanaru of Athiyara Madom, who had earlier issued Ext.P1 consent letter dated 10.06.2003 in favour of the petitioner, submitted Ext.P5 representation dated 05.09.2013 before the 1[st] respondent Board against the said order. Pursuant to the direction contained in Ext.P6 order of this Court dated 21.10.2013 in W.P. (C)No.23391 of 2013, the 1[st] respondent Board issued Ext.P7 order dated 20.11.2013, whereby the request made in Ext.P5 representation stands rejected, thereby permitting the 4[th] 5 W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2013 & W.P.(C)No.26034 of 2019 respondent herein to perform Tantric rites and duties at Manacaud Devaswom. The petitioner has sought for a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P7 order dated 20.11.2013 of the 1[st] respondent Board and a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 and 2 to permit him to perform Tantric rites and duties at Aryasala, Chenthitta and Manacaud Devaswoms. 2.1. On 06.12.2013, when this writ petition came up for admission, this Court admitted the matter on file. The learned Standing Counsel took notice for respondents 1 and 2. Urgent notice was ordered to respondents 3 and 4. 2.2. The 1[st] respondent Travancore Devaswom Board has filed a counter affidavit dated 07.10.2022, opposing the reliefs sought for in this writ petition. 3. W.P.(C)No.26034 of 2019:- During the pendency of W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2013, the petitioner has filed this writ petition, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P9 order dated 06.08.2019 of the 1[st] respondent Travancore Devaswom Board, which was one issued pursuant to the directions contained in Ext.P8 judgment of this Court dated 07.11.2018 in W.P. (C)No.36125 of 2018, whereby the claim made by the petitioner in Ext.P7 representation dated 06.10.2018, on the strength of Ext.P6 consent letter dated 05.11.2017 of Sri Rudraru 6 W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2013 & W.P.(C)No.26034 of 2019 Narayanaru of Athiyara Madom, the 5[th] respondent herein, to perform permanently the Tantric rites and duties at Aryasala, Chenthitta and Manacaud Devaswoms stands rejected, reiterating the earlier stand taken by the 1[st] respondent Board in its orders dated 29.08.2013 and 20.11.2013 [Exts.P4 and P7 in W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2013]. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 and 2 to permit the petitioner to perform Tantric rites and duties at Aryasala, Chenthitta and Manacaud Devaswoms, as per Exts.P2 and P6 consent letters dated 10.06.2003 and 05.11.2017 of the 5[th] respondent Sri Rudraru Narayanaru of Athiyara Madom and Ext.P4 communication dated 09.11.2006 of the 2[nd] respondent Devaswom Commissioner. 3.1. On 30.09.2019, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Single Judge directed Registry to place the matter before the Devaswom Bench. 3.2. The 1[st] respondent has filed a counter affidavit dated 18.10.2019, opposing the reliefs sought for in this writ petition. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner in the respective writ petitions and the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board. 5. As borne out from the pleadings and materials on 7 W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2013 & W.P.(C)No.26034 of 2019 record, the right to perform Tantric rites and duties at Aryasala, Chenthitta and Manacaud Devaswoms is with Athiyar Madom, Vanchiyoor. Sri Rudraru Narayanaru of Athiyara Madom, the 3[rd] respondent in W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2003, had earlier issued Ext.P1 consent letter dated 10.06.2003 in favour of the petitioner for performing Tantric rites and duties at Aryasala, Chenthitta and Manacaud Devaswoms. The petitioner, who belongs to Thiruvalla Thekkedath Illam, was informed vide Ext.P2 communication dated 09.11.2006 of the 2[nd] respondent Devaswom Commissioner that, vide Board order dated 28.10.2003 the petitioner has been permitted to perform Tantric rites and duties at Aryasala, Chenthitta and Manacaud Devaswoms until further orders. The specific stand taken by the 1[st] respondent Board in the impugned orders and also in the counter affidavit filed in both the writ petitions is that the petitioner, who is not a member of Athiyar Madom, Vanchiyoor was permitted provisionally to perform Tantric rites and duties at Aryasala, Chenthitta and Manacaud Devaswoms, based on Ext.P1 consent letter dated 10.06.2003 issued by Sri Rudraru Narayanaru of Athiyara Madom, the 3[rd] respondent in W.P. (C)No.29797 of 2003, on account of the death of the Chief Tantri of Athiyara Madom. By Ext.P4 proceedings dated 29.08.2013, 8 W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2013 & W.P.(C)No.26034 of 2019 the petitioner was informed that, based on the request made by the Tantri of Athiyara Madom, the Board has decided to give back the right to perform Tantric rites and duties at Manacaud Devaswom to Athiyara Madom. Sri Narayanaru Ramaru, the 4[th] respondent in W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2013, who belongs to Athiyar Madom, made a request before the 1[st] respondent Board, stating that he was willing to continue as the Tantri of Aryasala, Chenthitta and Manacaud Devaswoms, who opposed the extension of the provisional arrangement in favour of the petitioner. 6. Section 28 of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institution Act, 1950 deals with Board's control over Karanma services. As per sub-section (1) of Section 28, the Board shall have absolute control over the holders of all Karanma services and also over all the properties, Thiruppuvarams and other emoluments attached thereto. As per sub-section (2) of Section 28, whenever it is reported that owing to incompetency, negligence or other cause, any Karanma service is not being regularly performed, or that an alienation of Karanma service or of the property, Thiruppuvaram or other emolument attached thereto, has been effected by the Karanma holder or by any member or members of the Karanma family, the Board shall give 9 W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2013 & W.P.(C)No.26034 of 2019 due notice of the charge to the head of the family and the next senior member, and also to such other members of the Karanma family as the said Board may deem necessary, and if after hearing their objections, if any, the Board is satisfied that there has been an alienation of the Karanma service of the property or of the Thiruppuvaram or of the other emoluments attached thereto or that there has been a failure to perform the service properly or regularly, the Board shall suspend, remove, determine, cancel or deal with in any other manner the Karanma right of the family to the service. As per sub-section (3) of Section 28, all alienations of Service Inam lands attached to specific services which have been or which may hereafter be made contrary to past usage shall be treated as null and void. The Board shall have the power to resume Service Inam lands attached to specific services if such lands are alienated or if the holders of such lands make a default in the performance of the services. As per the proviso to sub-section (3) of Section 28, the Board may in its discretion deal with such lands and the services connected therewith in any other manner as it may deem fit. As per sub-section (4) of Section 28, any person deeming himself aggrieved by any decision passed under sub-section (2) and subsection (3) may, within a period of one year from the date of 10 W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2013 & W.P.(C)No.26034 of 2019 such decision, institute in the District Court within whose jurisdiction the property is situated a suit to establish the right which he claims in respect of the property. As per the proviso to sub-section (4) of Section 28, subject to the result of the suit, if any, the decision of the Board passed under sub-section (2) and sub-section (3) shall be final. 7. In **Vishnu Narayanan Namboodiri v. Travancore Devaswom Board [2001 (3) KLT 888]** a Division Bench of this Court held that as per Section 28 of the Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, the Board shall have absolute control over the holders of all Karanma services and also over all the properties, Thiruppuvarams and other emoluments. Whenever it is reported that owing to incompetency, negligence or other cause, any Karanma service is not being regularly performed or that alienation of Karanma service or of the property, Thiruppuvaram or other emolument attached thereto, has been effected by the Karanma holder or by any member or members of the Karanma family, the Board shall give due notice of the charge to the head of the family and the next senior member, and also to such other members of the Karanma family, as the said Board may deem necessary, and if after hearing their objections if any, the Board is satisfied that there 11 W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2013 & W.P.(C)No.26034 of 2019 has been an alienation of the Karanma service or of the property or of the Thiruppuvarams or of the other emoluments attached thereto or that there has been a failure to perform the service properly or regularly, the Board shall suspend, remove, determine, cancel or deal with any other manner the Karanma right of the family to the service. 8. In the instant case, the petitioner has no case that such a course has been undertaken by the 1[st] respondent Travancore Devaswom Board invoking the provisions under subsection (2) of Section 28, of the Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner would rely on the provisions under clause (9) of Chapter IV of the Travancore Devaswom Manual - Vol.II (Office Manual). 10. As per clause (9) of Chapter IV of the Travancore Devaswom Manual - Vol.II (Office Manual), in the case of families in which there are no adult male members, the senior most female member or the manager of the family for the time being, as the case may be, may nominate a proxy for attending to the Tantric duties of the family till a competent male member becomes available, provided the usage in the temple concerned admits Tantram Service by proxy, but the power to accept or 12 W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2013 & W.P.(C)No.26034 of 2019 reject the nomination rests with the Board. If the proxy so nominated is not himself a recognised Tantri, he will be required to produce a certificate of fitness from a Tantri to be specified by the Devaswom Commissioner. The minor, when he comes of age, will be allowed to enter upon his duties only after the production of a similar certificate and with the sanction of the Devaswom Commissioner. In the case of families which have no male members, major or minor, and in which there is no prospect of any issue (as in families composed of widows alone) the right of the family to the Tantram will cease and the Board will be at liberty to appoint a suitable person to the vacant post. 11. The provisions under clause (9) of Chapter IV of the Travancore Devaswom Manual - Vol.II (Office Manual) would not support the claim of the petitioner, who is admittedly not a member of Athiyara Madom, to perform Tantric rites and duties at Aryasala, Chenthitta and Manacaud Devaswoms. When alienation of Karanma rights is legally impermissible in view of the prohibition contained in sub-section (2) of Section 28 of the Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, the petitioner cannot rely on the consent letter dated 05.11.2017 (Ext.P6) of Sri Rudraru Narayanaru of Athiyara Madom, the 5[th] respondent in W.P.(C)No.26034 of 2019, in support of his claim to perform 13 W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2013 & W.P.(C)No.26034 of 2019 permanently the Tantric rites and duties at Aryasala, Chenthitta and Manacaud Devaswoms. 12. In the above circumstances, the challenge made against the impugned orders in both the writ petitions fails and the petitioner is not entitled to any of the reliefs sought for. In the result, both the writ petitions are dismissed. No order as to costs. Sd/- ## **ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE** Sd/- **P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE** yd 14 W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2013 & W.P.(C)No.26034 of 2019 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29797/2013** ## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT LETTER DTD 10/6/2003 ADDRESSED BY RUDRARU NARAYANARU TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD 9/11/2006 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DTD 5//2013 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS BEARING NO 120/13/MISI DTD 29/8/2013 OF THE SECRETARY TRIVANDRUM DEVASWOM BOARD EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD 5/9/2013 ISSUED BY THE RTH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD 21/10/2013 IN WPC NO 23391/2013 OF THIS HON'BLE HIGH COURT EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED B YTHE IST RESPONDENT BEARING NO 147/13/MIS1 DTD 20/11/2013** 15 W.P.(C)No.29797 of 2013 & W.P.(C)No.26034 of 2019 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26034/2019** **PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION BY 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 09.06.2003 TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 10.06.2003 IN STAMP PAPER BY SHRI.RADHRANARAYANARU.** - **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE BOARD ROC NO. 7420/03 MIS.1 DATED 28.10.2003.** - **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ROC NO.4987/03/PR DATED 09.11.2006 OF THE BOARD.** - **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ROC NO. 3204/17/PR DATED 27.07.2017 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 05.11.2017 GIVEN BY SHRI. RUDRANARAYANARU TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION GIVEN BY PETITIONER BEFORE BOARD DATED 11.07.2018.** - **EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(c) NO. 36125 OF 2018 DATED 07.11.2018.** - **EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ROC NO.7420/03/MIS-1 DATED 06.08.2019 ISSUED BY THE BOARD.**