NARAYANA LAL Vs. MANKUZHI MADHAVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under S.9 and 32 of the Hindu Religious Institutions Act(Travancore Cochin Act XV of 1950)hereinafter the Act is by a Hindu praying: "( 1)that the respondents be removed from their office of members of the Travancore Devaswom Board;( 2)that an auditor be appointed to make a report,specifying all cases of irregular,illegal or improper expenditure or of failure to recover money or other property due to the Travancore Devaswom Board or to institutions under the management,or of loss or waste of money or other property,caused by neglect or misconduct on the part of the members of the Board;( 3)to pass an order of surcharge against the respondents on consideration of the said report;( 4)to make such orders as to costs as this Honourable Court deems proper;and(5)to pass any order just,necessary and incidental as this Honourable Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of this application."

(2.) THE prayers Nos.( 2)and(3)can be disposed of easily.They are for action under S.32 of the Act which provides for annual audit of the accounts of the Board by auditors appointed by this Court.By Proceedings No.A1 -2006/58 dated October 30,1958,this Court has appointed the Examiner of Local Fund Accounts,Trivandrum,to be the Auditor "from 1956 -57 onwards "and he has since then,been submitting regular reports of his audit.Considering the volume of accounts that he has to check accounts of the Board as well as of the numerous institutions under its management it will naturally take some time for the auditor to prepare his report.Audit reports are come for the years 1961 -62 and 1962 -63 and they are pending consideration in this Court.The reports for later years are awaited.The consideration of audit reports under S.32 of the Act is done by this Court at a public hearing.S.32(12)of the Act directs a copy of the audit report to be given "to any person who duly applies for the same " ;.The petitioner himself has and attested copy of the report for the year 1962 -63.It is open to him to intervene when the relevant audit reports are taken for consideration in this Court and press his views and solicit the Court to pass appropriate orders thereon.It cannot be done on this application in which the Devaswom Board,whose accounts are sought to be audited,is not a party.S.4 of the Act provides:"The Board shall be a body corporate.. and... shall by its mame sue and be sued and the Secretary to the Board shall represent the Board in such suits."A proceeding against the members of the Board who alone are respondents here cannot in the light of S.4 of the Act be reckoned as a proceeding against the Board.The prayers for appointment of an auditor and for passing an order of surcharge on consideration of his report are therefore infractuous and unnecessary.They need not and cannot be heard here. The only prayer that is material and relevant before me is prayer No.( 1 ),which is for action under S.9 of the Act.That section requires an application for removal of a member of the Travancore Devaswom Board hereinafter the Board to be heard by a single Judge in the first instance,who shall,if he finds no prima facie case,reject the same,or,if he finds a prima facie case,refer the same,stating his reasons therefor,to a Division Bench.The question therefore is whether on the averments made by the petitioner and the answers given thereto by the respondents,a prima facie case for removal of the respondents from their office as members of the Board is made out.

(3.) SEVEN acts of misbehaviour,amounting to violation of statutory duties of the Board under S.24,26,30 and 31 of the Act,are pressed into service by counsel for the petitioner,as making out prima facie grounds for removal of the respondents from office,and they are: (1)that the respondents have either stopped or reduced the rituals and ceremonies,like Namaskaram,Nivedyam,Masavisesham and Aattavisesham in Devaswoms; (2)that they have,without attending to their obligatory duty of renovating dilapidated or damaged temples,diverted Devaswom Funds to non obligatory matters,like establishment of colleges; (3)that they undertook unnecessary travels and drew huge amounts as travelling allowances from the Devaswom fund; (4)that they are not carrying out the religious services for which specific endowments have been made by devotees,like the free distribution of Nivedyam in the Aranmula temple on Thiru Onam day instituted by Mangatt Bhattathiri; (5)that they diverted illegally the private funds of P.D.Devaswoms to purposes unconnected with those Devaswoms; (6)that they spent Devaswom Surplus Funds for purposes,like purchase of a school and deposits of security with the University of Kerala for running colleges,which are not warranted by S.36 of Act;and (7)that they have removed gold accumulated out of offerings in temples,like Ettumanur Mahadevar temple,with the object of dissipating the same in utter disregard of 'the sentiments of the worshippers ' ;.