IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 26995 of 2009(T)
1. K.P.ASOKAN
... Petitioner
Vs
1. CHAIRMAN, TRUSTEE BOARD
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.V.V.ASOKAN
For Respondent :SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN,SC,MALABAR DEVASWOM
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :24/09/2009
O R D E R
P.R.RAMAN & P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
-------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 26995 of 2009
-------------------------------
Dated this the 24th September, 2009
J U D G M E N T
Raman, J.
Petitioner is styled as a devotee. He is vindicating
the grievance of ‘Moosaths of Vattoli Illam, who had hereditary
right to conduct the poojas in Sree Pisharikavu Devaswom
Temple, Kollam. Moosaths himself is not stated to be disabled in
any way to approach the legal forum for redressal of his
grievance.
2. Be that it may, the contention raised in the writ
petition is that the action of respondents 1 and 2 are upsetting
the existing customary practice of ‘Ariyilezhuthu’ vazhipad
conducted by Moosaths of Vattoli Illam on Vijayadashami day in
Sree Pisharikavu Devaswom Temple, and also to permit others to
conduct said vazhipadu.
W.P.(C) No.26995/2009
2
In other words, what is attempted to be done by
respondents 1 and 2 is contrary to the custom and practice.
Custom and Practice is a civil right to be proved after adducing
both oral and documentary evidence. Article 226 of the
Constitution of India cannot be entertained in such cases. Even
treating this as a exceptional case, we will not be able to grant
any relief as sought for. Hence, relegating the petitioner to avail
the normal remedies available to him, we decline this jurisdiction.
Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed.
P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
nj.