IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN THURSDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2010 / 31ST ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 16504 of 2010(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- PADANAYARKULANGARA SHREE MAHADEVA KSHETHROPADESAKA SAMITHY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, S.PRAHALADAN, S/O.SANKUNNY, CHIRAKKADA HOUSE, PADA NORTH, KARUNAGAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.B.GOPAKUMAR SMT.CHINCY GOPAKUMAR RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER DEVASWOM BOARD JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, PADANAYARKULANGARA DEVASWOM, KARUNAGAPPALLY. ADDL. RESPONDENT: 3. M.N.MADHUSOODHANAN NAMBOODIRI, MELSANTHI, PADANAYARKULANGARA SREE MAHADEVA TEMPLE, PADANAYARKULANGARA, KARUNAGAPPALLY GROUP, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, RESIDING AT KRIPA BHAVAN, PADANAYARKULANGARA NORTH, KARUNAGAPALLY. (ADDL. RESPONDENT IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT.1.7.2010 IN I.A. 8397/2010.) ADV. SRI.P.G.PARAMESWARA PANICKER, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R1 SRI.VENUGOPALA PANICKER SRI.P.GOPAL FOR R1 SRI.N.SUKUMARAN FOR ADDL.R3 SRI.S.SHYAM FOR ADDL.R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. .................................................................... W.P.(C) No.16504 of 2010 .................................................................... Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2010. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. The petitioner, the Advisory Committee of a major temple, approached this court for direction to the Devaswom Board to take appropriate action for shifting the Mel Santhi and to take action against the Assistant Commissioner. This court passed interim orders on 3.6.2010 directing the Commissioner to enquire into the matter and file a report. The Commissioner got enquiry done through the Deputy Commissioner. The result of enquiry is that Assistant Commissioner was found to be involved in gross misappropriation and consequently he was suspended. So far as Mel Santhi of the temple is concerned, the allegation is that he was collecting money from devotees instead of the Devaswom collecting amount from them. While there is 40% increase in hundi collection from 2008-2009 to 2009-2010, the increase in vazhipadu income is less than 10%. Prima facie there is substance in the contention that vazhipadu is done by the Mel Santhi in his own 2 account by directly dealing with the devotees. In any case the proposal of the Devaswom to transfer the Mel Santhi is perfectly in order. We dispose of the W.P.(C) by approving the same. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge P.S.GOPINATHAN Judge pms