VISHNUNARAYANAN Vs. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE & DEVASWOM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 'Melsanthies' of Sabarimala Devaswom (Sabarimala Sree Dharma Sastha Temple) and Malikappuram Devaswom (Malikappuram Temple) are appointed for a period of one year. Every year, the Travancore Devaswom Board invites applications for appointment of Melsanthies of Sabarimala Devaswom and Malikappuram Devaswom and makes appointments following the procedure prescribed. The notification issued for the year 1193ME (2017-18) is in question in W.P.(C)No.26003 of 2017. The notification issued for the year 1197ME (2021-22) is in question in the other writ petitions, i.e., W.P.(C)Nos. 13823, 13834, 14067, 14136, 14283 and 14484 of 2021. In all the writ petitions, the challenge is against the eligibility criteria prescribed in those notifications that the applicant shall be a 'Malayala Brahmin'. Since the questions involved are common, these writ petitions were heard together.

(2.) The Travancore Devaswom Board and the Devaswom Commissioner are common respondents in all the writ petitions. They filed counter affidavits in W.P.(C)No.26003 of 2017 and W.P.(C)Nos. 13823, 14136 and 14484 of 2021. They contend that the selection of Melsanthies in Sabarimala Devaswom and Malikappuram Devaswom are to be completed before the first of Thulam (Malayalam Era) every year. The selection process is as directed by this Court as well as the Apex Court in various decisions. There were disputes as regards the constitution of the selection committee and guidelines framed by the Board regarding the process of appointment. The guidelines for appointment, which contain the eligibility criteria, were under challenge in various proceedings before this Court. This Court approved the guidelines containing eligibility criteria for the selection of Melsanthies in the order dtd. 3/4/2002 in R.P.No. 94 of 2002 in O.P.No.28670 of 2000. It was modified from time to time and lastly, as per the order dtd. 24/6/2009 in Report No.76 of 2008 in O.P.No.3821 of 1990. The constitution of the Selection Committee was also as ordered by this Court. The constitution of the selection was revised by this Court many times. When the matter was taken up before the Apex Court by filing Civil Appeal Nos.2570-71 of 2003, the question regarding the constitution of the Selection Committee was resolved through mediation and the report of the Mediator was approved by the Apex Court, as per the order dtd. 6/9/2011 in the aforesaid Civil Appeals. The guidelines also stand approved by the Apex Court, in view of the order in Civil Appeal Nos.2570-71 of 2003. Therefore, the petitioner cannot question the said eligibility criteria in these writ petitions.

(3.) Additional Respondent Nos.4, 5 and 6 were impleaded in W.P.(C)No.26003 of 2017 as per different orders. The additional respondents, however, did not file any written objections. Additional respondents 4 to 10 are impleaded in W.P.(C)No.14484 of 2021 as per different orders. Besides the Travancore Devaswom Board and the Devaswom Commissioner, additional respondents 4 and 10 in W.P.(C)No.14484 of 2021 have filed counter affidavits, opposing the reliefs sought for.