Thrikkaipetta Siva Kshetra Committee v. State of Kerala and 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 10[TH] DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 18TH ASWINA, 1945 ``` ``` W.P.(C)NO.32802 OF 2023 ``` ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` THRIKKAIPETTA SIVA KSHETHRA COMMITTEE, REG. NO. WYD/CA/57/2023, THRIKKAIPETTA P.O., MUTTIL MEPPADI ROAD, VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT - 673577, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, VINODAN A.B., AGED 58 YEARS, S/O A.V. BALAN, ALOOPADICKAL HOUSE, THRIKKAIPETTA P.O., WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 673577 ``` ``` BY ADVS. K.R.RAJKUMAR JAGADEESH LAKSHMAN R.K.RAKESH NANDANA BABU T. SREELAKSHMI P.S. ``` ``` RESPONDENTS: ``` ``` 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (DEVASWOM), GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001 2 MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER & SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM HEAD QUARTERS, HOUSEFED COMPLEX, NEAR PASSPORT OFFICE, ERANHIPPALAM P.O., KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673006 3 *[THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, O/O ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MINI CIVIL STATION, TIRUR, TIRUR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676101 *[ AS PER ORDER DATED 06/10/2023 IN WP(C) 32802/2023 THE ``` 2 W.P.(C)No.32802 of 2023 ``` DESCRIPTION OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT IS CORRECTED AS : "THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, O/O ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE - 673 020."] ``` - **`4 THE DEVASWOM EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SHREE THRIKKAIPETTA DEVASWOM, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, SHREE THRIKKAIPETTA SIVA TEMPLE, THRIKKAIPETTA P.O., MUTTIL MEPPADI ROAD, VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 673577`** - **`5* *ADDL.R5 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VYTHIRI POLICE STATION, WAYANAD - 673 577 [ADDL.R5 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 06.10.2023 IN WP(C) 32802/2023]`** ``` THE ADDRESS OF ADDL.R5 IS CORRECTED AS ``` ``` *STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MEPPADI POLICE STATION, KALPETTA P.O., WAYANAD, PIN – 673 577 ``` ``` AS PER ORDER DATED 10.10.2023 IN THIS WRIT PETITION. ``` ``` BY ADV MAHESH V RAMAKRISHNAN ``` ``` OTHER PRESENT: ``` ``` 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 10.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 3 W.P.(C)No.32802 of 2023 ## **JUDGMENT** ## **Anil K. Narendran, J.** The petitioner, namely, Thrikkaipetta Shree Siva Kshetra Committee, a society registered under Societies Registration Act, 1860, with registration No.WYD/CA/57/23, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking various reliefs including a declaration that the petitioner is entitled to manage the day-to-day affairs of Thrikkaipetta Shree Siva Temple. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P2 notice dated 25.09.2023 and Ext.P3 notice dated 26.09.2023 issued by the 4[th] respondent Executive Officer of Shree Thrikkaipetta Devaswom, which is a controlled institution under the Malabar Devaswom Board. 2. On 05.10.2023, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Standing Counsel for Malabar Devaswom Board sought time to get instructions. 3. On 06.10.2023, the learned Standing Counsel for Malabar Devaswom Board, on instructions, submitted that, one Girish Kumar C.V. has been appointed as the Executive Officer of Thrikkaipetta Shree Siva Temple, vide an order dated 06.05.2023 of the Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board, after replacing the 4 W.P.(C)No.32802 of 2023 then existing Executive Officer, K.C. Sadanandan. The learned Standing Counsel also pointed out Circular No.HRH/5/8246/06 dated 15.06.2007 issued by the Commissioner of the erstwhile Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment (Administration) Department, regarding the formation of committees in the temples, which are the controlled institutions under the Malabar Devaswom Board. The submission made by the learned Standing Counsel was that a permanent committee or Samithi for management of the temples, which are the controlled institutions of Malabar Devaswom Board, is legally impermissible and the management of such temples shall be with the hereditary trustees or a trustee board constituted as per the scheme or the provisions of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951. 4. On 16.10.2023, the learned counsel for the petitioner made available for the perusal of this Court a few photographs taken while the devotees voluntarily cleaned the temple pond, which was in a bad shape. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also handed over two screenshots evidencing payment of Rs.50/- made to the Google Pay account of one Praveen M.K., through the mobile number exhibited in front of the Vazhipadu counter. The learned counsel submitted that the screenshots shall 5 W.P.(C)No.32802 of 2023 be placed on record before the next posting date. The learned Standing Counsel for Malabar Devaswom Board sought time to get instructions regarding the above aspects through the Assistant Commissioner. 5. On 16.10.2023, the learned Government Pleader took notice on admission for the 1[st] respondent and also for the additional 5[th] respondent. The learned Standing Counsel for Malabar Devaswom Board took notice on admission for respondents 2 and 3. Urgent notice on admission was ordered to the 4[th] respondent by special messenger, returnable on 10.10.2023. This Court passed an interim order on 16.10.2023, whereby the 4[th] respondent Executive Officer was restrained from proceeding further with Ext.P3 notice dated 26.09.2023 to auction two cows and two calves in Thrikkaipetta Shree Siva Temple. Further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P2 notice dated 25.09.2023 were ordered to be deferred for a period of one week. The 4[th] respondent Executive Officer was directed to take necessary steps to ensure that there is no unauthorised collection of money from the devotees for offering Vazhipadu in Thrikkaipetta Shree Siva Temple. 6. Today, when this matter is taken up for consideration, along with I.A.No.1 of 2023, the petitioner has placed on record 6 W.P.(C)No.32802 of 2023 Ext.P7 photograph regarding the cleaning of the temple pond; Ext.P8 screenshot of Google pay transaction made on 03.10.2023 and Ext.P9 screenshot of WhatsApp profile. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Senior Government Pleader for the 1[st] respondent State and also the additional 5[th] respondent Station House Officer, Meppadi and the learned Standing Counsel for Malabar Devaswom Board for respondents 2 to 4. 8. 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 sub-section (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. 9. In **Payyannur Sree Subrahmanya Swami Kshethrodharana Samithi and another v. Malabar** 7 W.P.(C)No.32802 of 2023 **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 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. - 9.1. The Division Bench noticed that the Madras Hindu 8 W.P.(C)No.32802 of 2023 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 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, 9 W.P.(C)No.32802 of 2023 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 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. 9.2. The Division Bench noticed that unlike the TravancoreCochin 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 10 W.P.(C)No.32802 of 2023 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 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. 9.3. 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 11 W.P.(C)No.32802 of 2023 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 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 12 W.P.(C)No.32802 of 2023 beyond. 9.4. 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 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 13 W.P.(C)No.32802 of 2023 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 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 14 ## W.P.(C)No.32802 of 2023 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 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. 10. 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, 15 W.P.(C)No.32802 of 2023 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 ഉൾമെടു്ിമകാ്ᩂ് ക്്ി രൂരീകരികാവു്രാണ. ഇ്ങമന രൂരീകരികു്ᩐ ക്ᩜ്റികൾ ്ഷേത്ര്ᩈിൽ യാമരാരു കാരണവശ്ാലുും ്ᩝിരൊയി ത്രവർ്ᩈികാൻ രാടു്ᩦര്ᩤ. ഒരു വർഷ്ഷ്ᩈ്ഷകാ അമ്ᩤ്ഝിൽ ഉ്ഷേശ്യലേയ്ങൾ രൂർ്ᩈീകരി്ചരിനു്ഷശ്ഷ്ഷൊ അമ്ᩤ്ഝിൽ ക്ᩜ്റിയുമട ത്രവർ്ᩈനും അവസാനിെികു്ᩐരിന് വകുെ് ക്ᩜീഷണർ ഉ്ᩈരവ് രുറമെടുവികുക്ഷയാ മെ്യു്ᩐരുവമര ഇരിൽ ഏരാണ് ആദ്യും വരിക, അര് കഴി്ᨼാൽ ക്ᩜ്റി രിരി്ചുവി്ഷട്ᩂരാണ്.” (underline supplied) 11. 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 16 ## W.P.(C)No.32802 of 2023 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 the non-hereditary trustees or fit persons have been appointed. 12. The learned counsel for the 4[th] respondent Executive Officer of Shree Thrikkaipetta Devaswom would submit that the temple is a D-Grade temple in which the annual income is about Rs.5,00,000/-. There is no sufficient funds to have a Goshala to maintain cows and calves. Therefore, Ext.P3 notice dated 26.09.2023 was issued for conducting a public auction of the cows and calves for the purpose of caring. 13. On a query made by this Court as to whether the 4[th] respondent has obtained permission of the Malabar Devaswom Board before issuing Ext.P3 notice for public auction, since the temple in question is a controlled institution, the learned counsel for the 4[th] respondent would submit that no such permission was obtained by the Executive Officer. 14. We find that the procedure adopted by the 4[th] 17 W.P.(C)No.32802 of 2023 respondent Executive Officer in issuing Ext.P3 notice for public auction cannot be sustained in the absence of any permission obtained from the Malabar Devaswom Board. The learned counsel for the 4[th] respondent would submit that since Ext.P3 notice for public auction was issued without obtaining the permission of the Malabar Devaswom Board, the 4[th ] respondent Executive Officer shall not proceed with the said notice. The said submission is recorded. 15. Insofar as the challenge made against Ext.P2 notice dated 25.09.2023 of the 4[th] respondent Executive Officer for the constitution of a committee for undertaking the renovation work in the temple in question is concerned, the constitution of such committees are governed by the provisions in Circular No.HRH5/8246/2006 dated 15.06.2007 issued by the Commissioner of the erstwhile Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (Administration) Department. A committee like the petitioner Society cannot have a role in the management of a temple, which is a controlled institution under the Malabar Devaswom Board. Now, the 4[th] respondent wants to constitute a committee for the purpose of renovation of the temple. It is for the 4[th] respondent to constitute such a committee strictly in terms of 18 W.P.(C)No.32802 of 2023 the provisions under the said circular dated 15.06.2007, which shall consist only of regular worshippers of the temple. The constitution of the committee shall be with proper notice to the worshippers and the activities of the committee shall also be strictly in terms of the provisions under the said circular. 16. Insofar as the collection of money from the devotees through the Google pay account of a person, by name, Praveen M.K. is concerned, the learned counsel for the 4[th] respondent would submit that he is the Vazhipadu Clerk in the temple. Three times Rs.50/- each were paid by devotees through his Google pay account, since the respective devotees have no sufficient change with them. 17. The learned counsel for the petitioner would point out the screenshot marked as Ext.P9, in which the name of the temple and also the name of the Malabar Devaswom Board finds a place. A Vazhipadu Clerk in a temple, which is a controlled institution under the Malabar Devaswom Board, cannot have a profile with the name of the temple and the name of the Devaswom Board, which is a serious irregularity. It is for the Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board to conduct a detailed enquiry into the matter through a competent officer, with proper notice to the Vazhipadu 19 ## W.P.(C)No.32802 of 2023 Clerk and take appropriate action, in accordance with law. The proceedings initiated in this regard shall be concluded within a period of two months. 18. The 4[th] respondent Executive Officer shall take necessary steps to ensure that the cows and calves referred to in Ext.P3 notice are taken care of appropriately, in the temple premises, for the time being, with the support of the devotees. It is for the Assistant Commissioner, Kozhikode, the 3[rd] respondent to take a decision on the above aspect, with notice to the 4[th] respondent Executive Officer and also the devotees of the temple, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, with a period of two months. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- **ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE** Sd/- **SOPHY THOMAS, JUDGE** MIN 20 W.P.(C)No.32802 of 2023 ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 32802/2023`** ## **`PETITIONER EXHIBITS`** ``` Exhibit P1 THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE POOJA CONDUCTED AT MANIKKUNNUMALA DATED NIL ``` ``` Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT PASTED ON THE WALLS OF THE TEMPLE DATED 25-09-2023 ``` ``` Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, THRIKKAIPATTA DEVASWOM DATED 26-09-2023 ``` ``` Exhibit P4 THE TRUE PHOTO OF THE VAZHIPADU COUNTER BOARD AT THE TEMPLE PREMISES DATED NIL ``` ``` Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LIST PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL WEB SITE OF MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD DATED NIL ``` ``` Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. RTI- 08/2023/MDB GIVEN BY THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD TO THE PETITIONER DATED 27-04-2023 ``` ``` Exhibit P7 THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE CLEANING PROCESS OF THE POND UNDERTAKEN UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE APPLICANT/PETITIONER COMMITTEE DATED NIL ``` ``` Exhibit P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SCREENSHOT OF THE UPI TRANSACTION WHICH WAS MADE IN THE GOOGLE PAY NUMBER 7034849697 DATED 03.10.2023 ``` ``` Exhibit P9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SCREENSHOT OF THE WHATSAPP BIO OF THE PROFILE OF MOBILE NUMBER 7034849697 DATED NIL ```