(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:
(2.) The main grievance is with regard to the claim of the petitioner to reside in the pathayappura of the temple on the specified dates and for getting free food for the members of the 'Mana' as stipulated in Ext. P1, which was executed when the temple was entrusted with the 'Ruler', subject to the conditions specified therein. It is also seen from Ext.P1 that the 'Mana' was not in a position to maintain the temple financially and because of the debts and various adverse circumstances, it was stipulated to be cleared by the 'Ruler'. In the course of time, the petitioner became aggrieved, that the specified extent of paddy '365 paras' to be given to the Mana was not being satisfied, which made the petitioner to approach this Court for appropriate relief.
(3.) It is stated that, pursuant to the intervention made by this Court, the requirement was satisfied, but later the Devaswom who stepped into the shoes of the 'Ruler' found that in place of 'Paddy' the money equivalent would be made available to the 'Mana', which was being satisfied. Since the money equivalent was found not adequate enough, on par with the market value, the price was increased by the Devaswom. The present grievance is more with regard to the right conferred as per Ext. P1 to reside in a portion of the Pathayappura during the time specified, when festival in the temple is being conducted and also as to the rights over 29 cents of land near the temple, where right of enjoyment was provided to the petitioner's 'Mana'. It is revealed from the proceedings that the 'Pathayappura' has already been demolished. As per the ealier proceedings before this Court, the grievance projected was limited and hence, no wider relief can be considered now, submits the learned standing counsel for the Devanswom.