COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD Vs. RAMACHANDRA KURUP AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VALIYALUKKAL Group Devaswom (for short V.G. Devaswom) is not an incorporated or unincorporated Devaswom, but it is stated to be an institution coming within the definition of Section 61(6) of the Travancore -Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as T.C.H.R.I. Act). V.G. Devaswom belongs to and under the sole management of a single family by name Maliyekkal family of erstwhile Cochin State. This is an application filed by the Secretary, Cochin Devaswom Board to grant permission to replace the Respondent -Trustee from the trusteeship of V.G. Devaswom by an officer of the Board to enable the Board to conduct an* enquiry into the affairs of the institution.

(2.) APPLICATION is purported to have been filed under Section 102(4) of the T.C.H.R.I. Act stating that V.G. Devaswom is a "Control Institution" under the Cochin Devaswom Board and hence the Board has got the right to replace the hereditary Trustee with an officer of the Board. In the application it is stated that the Cochin Devaswom Board has the statutory power to audit accounts and supervise the financial activities of the Control Institution. Further it is also stated that under Sections 84(1) and 107(3) of the T.C.H.R.I. Act, the Trustee of Control Institution is bound to submit to the Devaswom Board the annual accounts of the Institution and the budget for audit and approval by the Board. It is stated that the Trustee of the Devaswom has not submitted annual accounts or budget to the Board except for a period from 1st August 1997 to 11th March 1998 and from 20th March 1998 to 15th May 1998. There was a deficit of Rs. 19,924 in the conduct of the annual festival and the amount was advanced from the funds of the Devaswom to close the accounts. Respondent -Trustee was directed by the Board to reimburse the amount the same was not done. Further proper accounts have also not been submitted by the Respondent. It is stated only by a thorough audit the actual financial position of the Devaswom could be ascertained so as to determine whether there is any misappropriation of the Devaswom funds. Trustee is not prepared to produce the accounts and registers for scrutiny and audit by the Devaswom Board. Reference was also made to certain complaints received from the devotees against the Trustee. In such circumstances the Board prayed that it is highly necessary to replace the Trustee so as to conduct a statutory enquiry into the affairs of the institution by an officer of the Board.

(3.) WITH regard to the complaint that the Respondent is not submitting annual budget it is stated that the Respondent has already submitted the annual audited statement for the years 1998 -99, 1999 -2000, 2000 -01 and 2001 -02. Further it was also stated that annual festival is being conducted under the leadership of the Respondent. Every year the Board used to give token amount for the conduct of pooram festival. During the years 2001 and 2002 no amount was paid to the Respondent and the amount sanctioned by the Board to the Respondent for participating the pooram festival during the year 2003 was Rs. 11,000 and the same was adjusted towards Rs. 19,924 to be remitted to the Board and even according to the Board, vide Annexure A10, the deficit is Rs. 8,924. Further it was also stated that the application is actuated by mala fides. President of the Devaswom Board is residing close to Valiyalukkal Temple and is enmical towards the family and misusing his office trying to take over the administration of the temple. Reference was also made to Annexure A2. Further it was also stated that Annexure A7 complaint from the so -called devotees was also tutored complaint to wreck vengeance on the Trustee and to take over the temple after conducting farce of an enquiry. Complaints, according to the Respondent, are made by the close associates of the President, complaining that the Trustee of the Devaswom is preventing the use of the temple compound and Samithi was constituted with the President of the Board as the convener, of which the first signatory of the complaint is none other than the committee member of the Samithi. Some of the complainants have also tried to intimidate the Trustee and his sister for which a police complaint was filed and F.I.R. was registered.