EXECUTIVE OFFICER CHATHANKANDARKAVU TEMPLE, PALAKKAD Vs. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SHORNUR, PALAKKAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Dedicated to Goddess Durga, Chathankandarkavu temple (hereinafter referred to as 'the temple') is situated at Ottappalam, Palakkad District. The main deity of the temple is Goddess Durga.

(2.) The temple was declared as a public religious institution coming under the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the HR&CE Act') by the Deputy Commissioner as per the order in O.A.No.3/2016. Subsequently, the Assistant Commissioner, Palakkad appointed an Executive Officer for the administration of the temple as per A5/1161/17/M.D.B/K.Dis. dated 24.5.2017 as disclosed from Ext.P2, which led to Ext.P1 Government Order declaring the temple as a public religious institution coming under the HR&CE Act. In compliance of Ext.P1, the fourth respondent appointed the petitioner as the Executive Officer to take over the administration of the temple.

(3.) In this context, it is relevant to note that before declaring the temple as public temple as per Ext.P1, admittedly, the 'Chathankandarkadavu Kshethra Bharana Samithi' was in administration of the temple. Almost all the Devaswom land except a small extent, where the temple and its property is situated, were lost consequent to the Kerala Land Reforms Act and the income of the temple was diminished to a great extent. A 'Kshethra Bharana Samithi' was engaged for the day to day rituals of the temple. The fifth respondent was the Secretary of the Samithi. Right from the very beginning, he has been contending that the temple along with its properties originally belonged to the 'Meppadi Manackal Neelakandan Nampoothiri' by virtue of partition Deed No.1232/1968 and the temple is owned and administered by the members of the family as 'Ooralan' by virtue of the conditions prescribed in the above said document. According to the fifth respondent, a Temple Advisory Committee was formed by the 'Ooralan' of the temple for the purpose of assisting him in the management of the affairs of the temple. Thus, it is asserted that the functioning and administration of the temple will in no way come within the definition of the temples that can be acquired and possessed by the Malabar Devaswom Board. On going through Ext.P1, it is clear that all the contentions raised by the 5th respondent was considered by the Government and issued Ext.P1 declaring the temple as a public religious institution coming under the HR&CE Act.