CHENGALEDAM NARAYANAN UNNI Vs. THE SECRETARY, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANTHENCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Read TDB report No.212/11. The matter relates to 71 cents of land of Sree Koothattukulam Dharmasastha Temple in Kottayam district. It appears that the temple was destroyed by fire and the Devaswom continues to operate some of its offices in the premises. As it would happen in cases where Devaswom Boards do not carry out their duties and responsibilities as trustees, the fact of the matter has now come to be that hardly 6 or 7 cents is with the Devaswom and the remaining portion is occupied by a town hall put up by the local panchayat; Government themselves have apparently granted a lease to Koothattukulam Co-operative Hospital and there is also a Government Servants' Co- operative Society building on that land. Lands which are stated to be belonging to a temple are in fact lands vested in the deity, meaning thereby that they are to be treated as properties of a minor and therefore, if the Devaswom Board, as trustees, fail in their duty to protect the property of a temple, the courts would intervene as it would, in cases which call for protection of properties of minors.

(2.) The mess in which the situation has now reached clearly shows that the Board authorities, from time to time, bestowed no attention to the upkeep of the land in question. It is unfortunate that they did not even think it necessary to re-build the temple which was lost to fire.

(3.) Though there were two earlier writ petitions before this Court and the matter was left open for consideration by the civil court, the learned Ombudsman is justified in pointing out Section 20A of the Land Conservancy Act which creates bar to jurisdiction of civil courts. Obviously, that provision was not brought to the notice of the learned Bench while the earlier proceedings were dealt with. Annexures B and C were issued leaving open the issue to be decided by the civil court. Having been rendered without noticing the binding statutory provisions contained in Section 20 A, annexures B and C are to be treated as per incuriam and cannot be reckoned as potent enough to thwart all further proceedings to recoup and recover the lands of the Devaswom which are essentially lands vested in the deity. In the aforesaid circumstances, the TDB shall move the competent authority under the Land Conservancy Act, in relation to the entire property which belongs to Sree Koothattukulam Dharma Sastha Temple. That authority will hear the necessary parties, including any Governmental office which is seen to be in possession of the property and proceed in terms of the Land Conservancy Act, in accordance with law. We may indicate that taking into consideration the larger public interest involved in having the institutions continue in the land where they are now situated, the competent authority under the LC Act would be justified in finding out ways and means of leading to a meaningful resolution of the disputes, including by the occupants paying appropriate amounts to the TDB, however ensuring that sufficient land is made available if TDB decides to have the temple put up. Let this exercise be carried out by the TDB by moving the competent authority within a period of one month from now and the competent authority taking appropriate decision after hearing all necessary parties without delay. It is also ordered that the complainant Sri.Chengaledam Narayanan Unni would also be entitled to participate in the aforesaid proceedings. The TDB will give him notice of institution of proceedings in terms of this order. It is further ordered that in the event of any negotiated settlement ultimately coming out, that shall be finalized only with the concurrence of the learned Ombudsman. DBP ordered accordingly. Communicate to the learned Ombudsman.