IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 3080 of 2010(O)
1. V.N.SAVITHRI, RESIDING AT KUTTANCHERRY
... Petitioner
2. UNNIKRISHNAN, ALATHIYOOR NAMBIYILLAM,
3. GIRIJA ALATHIYOOR NAMBIYILLAM,
4. MAHESWARI ALATHIYOOR NAMBIYILLAM,
5. JAYASREE ALATHIYOOR NAMBIYILLAM,
6. NARAYANAN NAMBOOTHIRI, PANTHAVOOR MANA
7. RAJAN NAMBOOTHIRI PANTHAVOOR MANA
8. LEELA ANTHARJANAM, KATTANCHERRY MANAYIL
9. HARAN NAMBOOTHIRI KATTANCHERRY MANAYIL
10. NANDINI, KATTANCHERRY MANAYIL
11. UMADEVI, KATTANCHERRY MANAYIL
12. SUBHADRA KATTANCHERRY MANAYIL
13. NARAYANAN NAMBOOTHIRI KATTANCHERRY MANAY
14. K.SAVITHIRI KATTANCHERRY MANAYIL
15. V.INDIRA, PANTHAVOOR MANA,
16. JAYANANDAN NAMBOODTHIRI KUTTANCHERRY
17. SREEDEVI ANTHARJANAM, ALATHIYOOR
18. K.RADHA, KUTTANVCHERRY MANA,
19. SOBHANA,KUTTANVCHERRY MANA,
20. HARI NAMBOOTHIRI,KUTTANVCHERRY MANA,
21. K.SREEDEVI, KIZHAKKEKUNNEL MANAYIL,
22. SAVITHRI ANTHARJANAM, ALATHIYUR MANAYIL,
Vs
1. V.N.SEKHARA PANICKER,
... Respondent
2. N.S.SKARAYOGAM NO.2486,
3. MARUTHORVATTOM SREE DHANWANTHARI TRUST,E
For Petitioner :SRI.S.SREEKUMAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR
Dated :30/01/2010
O R D E R
V. RAMKUMAR, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
W.P.(c).No.3080 of 2010
= = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 30th day of January, 2010
JUDGMENT
The writ petitioners are the plaintiffs in
O.S.No.82/1999 on the file of the Sub Court, Cherthala. The
petitioners are members of the Malayala Brahmin
Community and members of an Illam by name Velludu Illam
at Vadakkancherry. The said suit is one for modification of
Ext.P1 Scheme settled by the Sub Court, Cherthala in
O.S.No.23/1988 in respect of the administration of a private
temple by name Maruthorvattom Sri. Dhanwanthari
Vilasam Bhagavathi temple. Eventhough the evidence in
the suit has already been closed, the suit is still pending and
has not been disposed of yet. As per Ext.P1 Scheme settled
by the Sub Court, Cherthala in O.S.No.23/1988, the
administration of the temple is with a committee consisting
of 8 members besides the President, Secretary, Manager
and two nominees of the Illam. Out of them the President
W.P.(c)No.3080 of 2010
2
and the Manager are to be the life members. The
President, who was appointed as per the Scheme, was one
Sreedhara Panicker who is now no more. The life time
Manager appointed as per the Scheme is the 1st respondent
one V.N. Sekhara Panicker. The existing Scheme
contemplates the appointment of a new President or a new
Manager in case the existing President or Manager is
unable to perform his functions due to absence or
resignation. As per Ext.P1 Scheme the appointment of a
new President or the Manager is to be made by the
Maruthovattom Dhanwanthari Vilasam NSS Karayogam. It
was apprehending the appointment of a new Manager by
the N.S.S Karayogam that the petitioners filed
I.A.No.2133/2009 before the court below seeking
permission to appoint a new Manager from among the
members of the Illam. The court below as per Ext.P4 order
dated 7.1.2010 dismissed the said application holding, inter
alia, that if at all a new Manager is to be appointed, that can
W.P.(c)No.3080 of 2010
3
be done only by the Maruthovattom Dhanwanthari Vilasam
NSS Karayogam, as per Ext.P1 Scheme and that there is no
need to interfere with the administration of the temple by
the court permitting the appointment of a new Manager.
The order passed by the court below cannot be faulted,
since going by the provisions of Ext.P1 Scheme, the
authority competent to appoint a new Manager is the
aforesaid NSS Karayogam . The court below has observed
in paragraph 7 of the impugned order that there is no need
for interference by the Court with the administration of the
temple by appointing a new Manager.
3. The present grievance of the petitioner is that the
NSS Karayogam is contemplating to appoint a new Manager
in the place of Sri.V.N.Sekhara Panicker the existing
Manager on the ground that he is unable to perform the
functions of the Manager due to illness. In the first place
the petitioners did not move the court below for any
prohibitory order against NSS Karayogam appointing a new
W.P.(c)No.3080 of 2010
4
Manager. Secondly, Ext.P1 contemplates appointment of a
new Manager only if the existing Manager is unable to
perform his functions as such either due to absence or on
account of resignation. When both the above contingencies
have not arisen, it is doubtful whether a new manager could
be appointed either by the NSS Karayogam or from among
the members of the Illam by recourse to the provisions of
Ext.P1 Scheme. The question of appointing a new Manager
even if it arises can be done only in accordance with Ext.P1
Scheme which has not been modified so far.
Under these circumstances, I am not inclined to
interfere with Ext.P4 order passed by the court below. This
writ petition is accordingly dismissed leaving it to the
petitioners to move the court below in case there is an
attempt by the NSS Karayogam to appoint a new Manager.
Dated this the 30th day of January, 2010.
V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE
sj