KOCHAMMINI THAMPURAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LAW AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the book Due Process of Law released in 1979, Lord Denning said:

(2.) Yet, the female members of the erstwhile Royal family of Cochin have approached this Court aggrieved by the disqualification imposed on them from being nominated as Trustees of the Palace Administration Board, as trusteeship is exclusively set apart to the male members, seeking a declaration that Section 4 of the Valiamma Thampuran Kovilakam Estate and the Palace Fund Proclamation IX of 1124 M.E (hereinafter referred to as 'the Royal Proclamation') to the extent it stipulates nomination of only the male members of the family to be trustees in the Palace Administration Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board') is unconstitutional.

(3.) The Royal proclamation was promulgated by the Maharaja of Cochin on 15th Midhunam 1124 ME corresponding to 29.06.1949, in order to make provisions for the administration, management and conservation of the properties of the Valiamma Thampuran Kovilakam Estate and the Palace Fund. The Travancore Cochin State was formed on 01.07.1949 just after 2 days of the promulgation of the proclamation. As per Section 3 of the Proclamation, the estate and palace fund shall vest in the palace administration board and the board shall administer the estate and the palace fund subject to the provisions of the proclamation. `Estate' is defined under Section 2(b) to mean the Valiamma Thampuran Kovilagam Estate and all the properties belonging to the said estate. The `palace fund' is defined under Section 2(c) to mean the special palace fund then in existence and the payments made from time to time by the Government towards the maintenance of the junior members of the family and it includes properties earned out of such fund and property owned in common by the family. Under Section 12, the Board is empowered to frame byelaws for the proper administration of the Estate and Palace Fund with the previous sanction of the Maharaja. Under Section 20, the Board is empowered to frame byelaws for regulating leave, payment of salary, discipline, control etc to the officers and servants of the Board; to fix the allowances of Trustees, audit of accounts, etc., supervision, control etc. of the properties of minor members, etc. subject to approval of Maharaja. As per Section 4, as it originally stood, the Board was to consist of 5 trustees who shall be nominated by the Maharaja of Cochin from among the male members of the family so as to secure representation for each of the 4 main thavazhies of the family. It further provided that one of the trustees shall be appointed as the President of the Board by the Maharaja of Cochin and the president and other trustees shall hold office for a term of 3 years from the date of their appointment. As per clause 22 of the proclamation, as it originally stood, the palace fund was impartible and the management of the estate and the palace fund were to be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the proclamation.