MOHANDAS RAI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners who are the devotees of Sri Ali Chamundi Bhagavati Temple, Arikkadi, Kumbla, Kasargod, claiming as the main 'Achara Sthanis' of that Temple filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs

(2.) Going by the averments in the writ petition, the 1st petitioner is the hereditary trustee and the seniormost member (Yajamana) of Bambrana family. The 2nd petitioner is the seniormost member (Karanavar) of Bellampadi Tharavadu. The 3rd petitioner is the seniormost member (Karanavar) Korikanada Tharavadu. The 4th petitioner is the President of Kumbla Pathodi Tharavadu. The 5th petitioner is the President of K.K. Veedu Tharavadu. The 6th petitioner is the Karmi of Gudde Tharavadu and the 7th petitioner is the seniormost member (Karanavar) known as 'Belchapada' of Bhandara Veedu. Sri Ali Chamundi Bhagavati Temple, Arikkadi, Kumbla, Kasaragod, is a listed temple under the Madras Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Act, 1951 ('the Act', in short). The 4th respondent, as per the order dtd. 18/2/2010 in O.A No.19 of 2009 framed Ext.P1 Scheme for the administration of the affairs of the temple which was modified by the 3rd respondent vide, Ext.P2 order dtd. 6/7/2010 in A.P No.6 of 2010. Ext.P2 was challenged by the 13th respondent before the Sub Court, Kasaragod which was dismissed vide, Ext.P3 judgment dtd. 18/8/2012 in O.S.No.150 of 2010. Ext.P3 judgment was set aside by this Court Vide, Ext. P4 judgment dtd. 1/11/2024 in MFA (HR&CE) No.6 of 2013. Ext. P2 order was challenged by some other devotees by filing W.P(C)No.26329 of 2012 before this Court which was also disposed of vide, Ext.P5 judgment dtd. 7/11/2012, finding that the petitioners therein may have an opportunity to file a revision before the 1st respondent and dismissed the writ petition, reserving all contentions to be raised in such revision. One K.Nagesh, a third party has filed R.P. No.912 of 2013, for reviewing Ext.P5 judgment in which Ext.P6 order dtd. 5/11/2013 was passed by this Court clarifying that the Judgment sought to be reviewed will not stand in the way of Government deciding on the issue as to whether the revision filed before it is maintainable under Sec. 99 of the Act. Consequently, the 1st respondent passed Ext.P7 order dtd. 28/2/2014. Ext.P7 order was also set aside by this Court vide Ext.P4 Judgment. Thus, as of now, Ext.P2 order dtd. 6/7/2010 in A.P.No.6 of 2010 passed by the 3rd respondent is in force. The petitioners are aggrieved by the acts of the respondents 6 and 8 to 11 in violating the rituals associated with the main festival of the aforesaid temple, 'Kaliyatta Maholsavam'. Until 2022, the festival was conducted complying all the rituals without fail. But in 2023, the aforesaid respondents circumvented the rituals associated with the festival, converted a godown near to Sri Ali Chamundi Bhagavati Temple which was earlier used to keep coconut and other items and locked the said godown after keeping some materials inside and claimed that it was the "new bhandara of bhagavati" and that the "old bhandara of bhagavati" preserved in "Bhandara Kshetra" was not necessary for conducting "Kaliyatta Maholsavam" of the aforesaid temple thereafter. The respondents 6 and 8 to 11 have no right to do so. The said act is against the rituals associated with "Kaliyatta Maholsavam" of Sri Ali Chamundi Bhagavati Temple which prevailed since time immemorial. As a result, in 2023 and 2024, the "Kaliyatta Maholsavam" was conducted by respondents 6 and 8 to 11 without conducting "Bhandara Purappad" and the procession from "Bhandara Kshetra". The festival was conducted without including the petitioners and their families in any of the rituals associated with "Kaliyatta Maholsavam", which is wrong and against rituals. Earlier, the 7th petitioner herein approached this Court by filing W.P(C). No.10746 of 2023, which was disposed of vide, Ext.P8 Judgment. Consequently, he filed Ext. P9 original application before the 4th respondent. Along with the original application, he filed I.A.No.23 of 2023 praying that the respondents therein should be restrained by an interim order of injunction from deviating the custom and tradition prevalent in Sri Bhagavati Ali Chamundy temple and for a direction to continue the practice to carry the 'Bhandaram' from the 'Bhandaramane' to the temple, with all other items enumerated therein and also from interfering with or obstructing the petitioner's right in any manner till the disposal of the original application which was disposed of by the 4 th respondent vide, Ext P10 order dtd. 24/11/2023. Challenging Ext. P10 order, the 7th petitioner herein approached the 3rd respondent by filing Appeal No.1 of 2024, which is pending disposal. Aggrieved, the petitioners filed Ext. P14 complaint before the 3rd respondent. But no action has been taken by the 3rd respondent so far. If the 3rd respondent is not considering Ext. P14 and inquire into it and take appropriate steps, it will halt the festival of this year, scheduled to be conducted from 22/3/2025. Hence, the petitioners approached this Court with this writ petition.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondents 14 and 15, the learned counsel for respondents 6 to 13, the learned Standing Counsel for the Malabar Devaswom Board and the learned Senior Government Pleader.