IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2008 / 11TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 2264 of 2004(T) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ HAREESWARAN NAMBOOTHIRI.T.M., S/O. LATE HAREESWARI NAMBOODIRI, THOZHUVANNUR MANA, VADAKKUMPURAM P.O., VALANCHERY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT BY ADV. DR.K.P.KYLASANATHA PILLAY SRI.ARUN.B.VARGHESE SRI.T.P.DEYANANTHAN SMT.SREEDEVI KYLASANATH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF DEVASWOM, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE COMMISSIONER, HR&CE DEPARTMENT, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, H.R.& C.E. DEPARTMENT, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE. 4. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HR & CE (ADMN.) DEPARTMENT, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 5. EXECUTIVE OFFICER, THOZHUVANNUR BHAGAVATHY DEVASWOM, VADAKKUMPURAM P.O., VALANCHERRY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. ADDL. RESPONDENTS: 6. UNNIKRISHNAN THULUVATH, S/O.VELAYUDHAN NAIR, THULUVATH VEEDU, THOZHUVANOOR POST, THIRUR. 7. P.T.JYOTHI, D/O.P.T.KRISHNAN, PULLANIKKATT THODI, THOZHUVANOOR POST, THIRUR. 8. KANAKKARAYI MUZHUVANCHERI PADICKAL, S/O.KOTHAKKAL, MUZHUVANCHERI PADICKAL VEEDU, VALANCHERY POST, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. (ADDL. RESPONDENTS ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT.29.3.2004 IN I.A. NO.2138/2004.) R6 TO R8 BY ADV. SRI.GOVIND K.BHARATHAN SRI.MANU MOHAN R1 TO R4 BY G.P. SMT.SMITHA SUKUMARAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DT.2.5.2003 ADDRESSED TO R1. P2: TRUE COPY OF POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD SHOWING RECEIPT OF P1 BY THE OFFICE OF R1. P3: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DT.2.5.2003 ADDRESSED TO R2. P4: TRUE COPY OF POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD SHOWING RECEIPT OF P3 BY R2. P5: TRUE COPY OF PETITION DT.5.5.2003 SUBMITTED TO R2. P6: TRUE COPY OF POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD SHOWING RECEIPT OF P5 BY R3. P7: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DT.5.5.2003 SUBMITTED TO R4. P8: TRUE COPY OF POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT SHOWING RECEIPT OF P7 BY R4. P9: TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT ISSUED BY COURIER SERVICE SHOWING TRANSIT OF COPY OF P7. P10: TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN CMP NO.2852/2003 IN OP NO.23415/02 DT.29.1.2003. P11: TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WPC 16578/03 DT.8.8.2003 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. P12: TRUE COPY OF ORDER DT.2.12.2003 ISSUED BY R4. P13: TRUE COPY OF PUBLIC NOTICE ISSUED REGARDING CONVENING OF MEETING ON 16.12.2003 FOR SELECTING NON-HEREDITARY TRUSTEES. P14: TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION DT.27.11.2003 ISSUED BY R4. P15: TRUE COPY OF LETTER DT.9.12.2003 ISSUED BY PETITIONER TO R4. P16: TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION DT.19.12.2003 ISSUED DIRECTING APPLICANTS WILLING TO ACT AS NON-HEREDITARY TRUESTEES, TO APPEARE BEFORE R4. P17: TRUE COPY OF POSTAL ENVELOPE CONTAINING P16 COMMUNICATION. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R6A: PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER DT.19.1.2004 OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, HR&CE. R4: TRUE COPY OF ORDER DT.19.1.2004. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ. .................................................................... W.P.(C) No.2264 of 2004 .................................................................... Dated this the 31st day of March, 2008. JUDGMENT C.N.Ramachandran Nair, J. The petitioner who is the Hereditary Trustee of Thozhuvannur Bhagavathy Temple is challenging the appointment of Non-Hereditary Trustees allegedly on political grounds and without consulting him. Government Pleader defended the appointment of three persons on the ground that selection was made from among devotees present in a meeting where petitioner also was present. It is reported that among the three persons selected, one is a member of the upper caste community, another a lady and the third, a member of the Scheduled Caste community. The petitioner's allegation is that these persons are not active devotees of the temple. Since the persons appointed are not parties in this W.P., we do not want to go into the question whether the selection was rightly made. Moreover, their tenure of appointment also would be over shortly, if not already over. This court in the decision in petitioner's own case, i.e. W.P. (C) No.16578/2003 dated 8.8.2003 held that selection should be made only from active devotees. This court has dealt with the subject in several 2 judgments and has repeatedly held that appointment should not be on political lines and should be from devotees who are genuine worshipers of the temple to whose trustee board they seek selection. Hereditary trustee is also entitled to notice under the statute. In the circumstances, we dispose of the W.P. directing respondents 2 to 5 to make fresh selection based on norms framed and based on judgments on the subject, particularly, the one in petitioner's own case produced as Ext.P11 in this W.P. If petitioner has grievance against selection, he is free to challenge the subsequent or fresh selection. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms