AMMANOOR PARAMESWARAN CHAKYAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are members of the Ammannoor Family. They have the hereditary right to perform 'Koothu' and 'Koodiyattam' at the Koothambalam in Koodalmanikyam Temple. That is a part of religious, spiritual, ritualistic and ceremonial worship of the Deity. Members of the Ammannoor Family alone can perform at the Koothambalam and a member should undergo an ordination ceremony before starting performance in the Koothambalam. It being a religious and ritual ceremony followed from time immemorial in the Temple, the 2nd respondent, Koodalmanikyam Devaswom Managing Committee cannot change the practice. It is recognised as a cultural heritage of humanity by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO).

(2.) Respondent No.1 filed counter affidavit justifying the decision of the 2nd respondent to open up the Koothambalam for other Hindu artists also, without affecting the rights of the petitioners. It is contended that the Koothambalam is more than two centuries old, which is considered to be the best of its kind in terms of design and functionality. The Koothambalam is intended for performance of 'Koothu' and 'Koodiyattam'. Now, the performance by members of the Ammannoor Family takes place for a few days in a year by leaving the Koothambalam idle for the remaining period. That leads to its poor upkeep and consequent degeneration. It is a heritage structure built up of wood. It was repaired and restored with the aid of the Central Government. It has to be put in regular use and thereby to keep away wood corroding worms and vermin. Now 'Koothu' and 'Koodiyattam' are performed in the Koothambalam without audience. The public are allowed to view the performance only through the slits on the sides. Unless the audience is permitted, the purpose of such performance could not be served. Such a divide between the performers and the audience is not in the interest of the general public and also the propagation of the said Temple art forms. The 1st respondent accordingly maintains that the decision taken by the 2nd respondent is quite legal.

(3.) Respondent Nos.2 and 4 filed a counter affidavit contending as follows: The Koothambalam was constructed utilizing Rs.3 1.002 crores allotted by the Department of Archaeology, Government of India. The decision taken by the 2nd respondent to allow Hindu artists other than members of the Ammannoor Family to perform in the Koothambalam does not in any way affect the rights of the petitioners. Members of the Ammannoor Family perform 'Koothu' and 'Anguleeyam' for 41 days during the festival and by allowing others to perform in the Koothambalam during the remaining days does not in any way affect the right of the petitioners. Such a decision was taken in the presence of the 5th respondent, who was nominated to the 2nd respondent Committee by the Government from among the Tantris. Since that decision was taken with the concurrence of Tantris, the petitioners have no right to question it. If the Koothambalam is kept idle, that will adversely affect its prosperity. The decision in question will be implemented only after getting necessary sanctions and holding a discussion with all concerned.