IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 29484 of 2007(I)
1. PRASADKUMAR, S/O.K.N.KRISHNA PILLAI,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, OFFICE OF
... Respondent
2. DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE
3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (WORKS), OFFICE
4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
5. THE ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER,
6. DEVASWOM SUB GROUP OFFICER,
7. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER,
For Petitioner :SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND
For Respondent :SRI.K.N.VENUGOPALA PANICKER, SC, TDB
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :07/08/2008
O R D E R
P.R. RAMAN &
T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
W.P.(C) NO. 29484 OF 2007
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
DATED THIS, THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2008.
J U D G M E N T
Raman, J.
This writ petition is filed challenging the inaction of the Devaswom
authorities in sanctioning sufficient amount for pathivu-paditharam in the
Padappad Sree Devi Temple, Kizhakken Muthoor in Kunnamthanam Sub
Group.
2. By an interim order, we directed Respondents 1 and 2 to pay an
amount of Rs. 1,500/- per month to meet the day – today expenses of the
said Temple and the same is being paid also. That will continue. As
regards the various other works connected with the temple, a statement has
been prepared by the respondent Board, which shows that most of the works
have been sanctioned by them. All that remains to be considered is the
temple pond improvement and also the request for a permanent flag mast.
These two items has been answered in paragraphs 6 and 7 of the statement
of the Board. It is stated that it involves huge expenditure and unless there
is public contribution and involvement of the temple advisory committee,
this work cannot be taken up at this stage.
3. After considering the submissions on both sides, we also found
that the temple pond improvement and construction of a permanent flag
WP(C) 29484/2007 :2:
mast are matters to be taken later, after conducting the other maintenance
work and that too, with the involvement of the temple advisory committee
and the devotees. After all other works are completed, it is open to the
temple advisory committee to convene a meeting of the devotees and place
the matter before them and make concrete suggestion as the amount of
contribution that can be collected from the public and a draft estimate shall
also be prepared, so that the actual expenditure to be met by the Devaswom
could be considered. Thereafter, it is open to the advisory committee to
approach the Board with such details.
4. However as regards the request for conducting repairs to the
existing pradakshina vazhi so as to make it useful, it appears that the Board
has not offered any remarks. Therefore, this is a matter which the Board
may consider and pass necessary orders since pradakshina vazhi is a must
in the temple and intended for use by the devotees and also for procession
of the deity, what is required is only to make necessary repairs to the
existing pradakshina vazhi.
The writ petition, in the above circumstances, is closed.
P.R. RAMAN,
(JUDGE)
T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,
(JUDGE)
knc/-