IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2011 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1932 DBA.No. 4 of 2008() ---------------------------- (IN THE MATTER OF COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD DISTRIBUTION OF PRASADAM & OTHER VAZHIPADU LIKE 'THAKIDU' ALES ETC. AT CHOTTANIKARA DEVI TEMPLE.) .......... APPLICANT (S): ---------- - ----------- 1. A.S.THRIVIKRAMAN NAMBOOTHIRI, KEEZSHANTHI/MELSANTHI, CHOTTANIKARA DEVASWOM, CHOTTANIKKARA. 2. T.P.KRISHNAN NAMBOOTHIRI, MELSANTHI/KEEZSHANTHI, CHOTTANIKARA DEVASWOM, CHOTTANIKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, TRICHUR. 2. EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CHOTTANIKARA DEVASWOM CHOTTANIKKARA. R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP,SC,COCHIN D.B SRI.C.E.UNNIKRISHNAN,SC,COCHIN DEV.BOARD BY ADV. SRI.KRISHNAKUMAR MANGOT, SC (AMICUS CURIAC) THIS DEVASWOM BOARD APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN & S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` D.B.A. No. 4 of 2008 ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2011 O R D E R Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Standing Counsel for the Cochin Devaswom Board and the learned Amicus Curiae on behalf of the learned Ombudsman for Devaswom Boards. The gist of the claim of the applicants in the DBA is that they are entitled to revision in the share of income out of poojas in connection with the Chottanikkara temple. Following certain directions issued earlier by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on 09- 09-1986 in W.P.Nos.14117-14118/1984 and in exercise of power under Section 122 of the Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950, the CDB has issued a notification fixing the conditions of service of santhikkars. This included clause 7 relating to vethanam. Sub-clause (b) DBA.4/2008 : 2 : of clause 7 deals with the provisions relating to entitlement of a portion of the income referable to the poojas. It pegged an upper limit of `1,000/-. That notification is a statutory notification and is the prescription as to conditions of service of santhikkars. If there is any requirement for modification to those provisions, that cannot be done by judicial tinkering, unless of course, it becomes necessary on the finding of violation of any constitutional rights. We notice that the grievance of the petitioners gained attention of the Ombudsman following a reference made in this case. The learned Ombudsman, for reasons stated in his report No.18, has opined that having regard to the change of circumstances and passage of time, it is worthwhile to consider increase in the upper limit of the share (vihitham) of `50,000/- per month. That is the ceiling limit suggested by the learned Ombudsman. We also notice that even in an earlier proceedings, viz, DBA.No.104/2006, there was a direction that the CDB would revise the rates after holding discussions DBA.4/2008 : 3 : with the santhikkars. This is a matter which has to be considered by the CDB, which is the statutory authority that is empowered to make conditions of service of santhikkars. We also record the submission on behalf of the petitioners that as far as Chottanikkara is concerned, a separate notification (Regulation) other than the one referred to by us above was also issued. If that were so, the Board would have to consider whether such regulations would require any modification. Either way, it is within the domain of the CDB to take such decision. We, therefore, direct the Cochin Devaswom Board to consider the issue relating to enhancement of the upper ceiling limit of vihitham of santhikkars of Chottanikkara temple and, if necessary, of the other temples also, in accordance with law, after giving the petitioners and any other persons entitled to be heard, an opportunity to place views. The views of the learned Ombudsman as also the observations in the earlier judgments would also be appropriately considered by the Board in accordance with law. A final decision in that DBA.4/2008 : 4 : regard shall be taken within an outer limit of six months from now. Until then, the status quo obtained in terms of the interim order will continue to govern the parties. The DBA is disposed of as above. Sd/- (THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE) Sd/- (S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE) aks // True Copy // P.A. To Judge