BHARGAVAN Vs. THANKAPPAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short but serious question that arises for consideration is, whether Sreenarayana Guru Mandiram involved in the case is a 'temple' within the meaning of R. 6 (2) (a) (ii) of THE Abkari Shop's (Disposal in auction) Rules 1974, for short, THE Rules.

(2.) THE petitioner is the defendant in the suit instituted by respondents 1 and 2 for a permanent injunction restraining the petitioner from conducting the sub-shop in question in the plaint schedule property. THE temporary injunction prayed for was granted by the trial court. On appeal the appellate court holding that "the idol installed in the Gurumandiram is a deity and the Gurumandiram referred to in the plaint is a temple as defined in the Kerala Abkari Shops (Disposal in auction) Rules, 1974" affirmed the order of the trial court. THE appellate court, it is seen from the judgment, has rejected all other contentions raised by the plaintiffs namely that the sub shop is situated within 400 metres from the supposed educational institution, st. Mary's Residential Central School and the Anganavadi etc. THE plaintiffs have not challenged those findings and therefore the only question that survives for consideration is the one mentioned above. THE answer to the above question depends upon the construction of the relevant provisions contained in the Rules. Temple has been defined thus: " Temple means, a place of public religious worship by Hindus where deity is installed under a building and includes a mutt also: Provided that any structure on the road side, pavement or in a compound of a private building with or without a deity shall not be considered as a Temple ". It is clear from this definition that in order to call an institution a temple, it must be a place of public religious worship by Hindus where a deity is installed in a building. THE proviso says that any structure on the road side, pavement or in a compound of a private building with or without a deity shall not be treated as a temple. Though the definition is not very happily worded, the content thereof is clear in that, in order to call an institution a temple, the same must be a place of public religious worship by hindus where a deity is installed. This definition of the word 'temple' to my mind, does not convey a meaning different from or in excess of the ordinary meaning, it has already acquired. In other words this definition is not meant to prevent the word 'temple' receiving its ordinary, popular and natural sense.

(3.) WE have already seen that to call an institution a temple, it must conform to Agama sastras; that is. the idol is consecrated and by such consecration the universal soul is localised and made to dwell in a particular place. When we say the universal soul we thereby mean The God Almighty. To swami Vivekananda (See His paper on Hinduism read at the Parliament of religions on 19th September, 1893) "god is the ever-active providence, by whose power systems after systems are being evolved out of chaos, made to run for a time and again destroyed. This is what the Brahmin boy repeats everyday: "the sun and the moon, the Lord created like the suns and moons of previous cycles". Yet another definition given by Swamiji is: "god is an infinite circle whose circumference is nowhere, but whose centre is everywhere. He works through all hands; sees through all eyes; walks on all feet; breathes through all bodies; lives in all life; speaks through every mouth; and thinks through every brain". The God concept in Hindu religion therefore is that every being is His part; in other words He is reflected in every being.