IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 14TH JULY 2011 / 23RD ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 37662 of 2010(G) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- K.THANKAMMAL, W/O. THANKAPPA CHETTIAR, RESIDING AT PANTHAYIL PARAMBU, POLICE STATION ROAD, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680 101. BY SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADVS. SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON, SRI.JIBU P THOMAS, SRI.P.S.APPU, SRI.NIKHIL S.KUMAR, SRI.C.A.ANOOP. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR, GURUVAYOOR P.O., THRISSUR-680 101. 2. THE MANAGING COMMITTEE, GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, GURUVAYUR P.O., THRISSUR-680 101. 3. MALATHI, D/O. PARVATHIAMMAL, RESIDING AT PANTHAYIL PARAMBU, KARAKKADU, GURUVAYUR, THRISSUR-680 101. R1 & R2 BY SRI. V. KRISHNA MENON, S.C, R3 BY ADV. SRI.M.V.S.NAMBOOTHIRY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.37662/2010-G: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE MANAGER OF THE R1 DEVASWOM DTD. 15/12/1966. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE EMPLOYMENT CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE R.1. DEVASWOM DTD. 18/06/2008. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE EMPLOYMENT CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE R.1. DEVASWOM DTD. 07/10/2010. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE R.1. DEVASWOM DTD. 03/12/2010. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE AUTHENTIC BOOK `HEAVEN ON EARTH' CONTAINING THE DETAILS OF THE PETITIONER DTD. NIL. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R3.A: COPY OF THE SUCCESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE MUNSIFF COURT, CHAVAKKAD, TO THE LEGAL HEIRS OF LATE CHELLAMMAL. EXT.R3.B: COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE R.3. TO GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM. EXT.R3.C: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 11/11/08 ISSUED TO THE R.3. BY THE DEVASWOM ADMINISTRATOR. EXT.R3.D: COPY OF THE LEGAL HEIRSHIP CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE TALUK TAHSILDAR, CHAVAKKAD TO THE R.3. EXT.R3.E: COPY OF THE CONSENT LETTER. EXT.R3.F: COPY OF THE CONSENT LETTER. EXT.R3.G: COPY OF THE CONSENT LETTER. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ----------------------------------- W.P(C).No.37662 OF 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 14th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan,J. The supply of gingely oil for the purpose of 'Enna Abhishekam' for Lord Guruvayoorappan in the Sree Krishna Temple, Guruvayoor was being made by one Narayanan Chettiar and Muthu Chettiar. With the passage of time, following the demise of Narayanan Chettiar, the petitioner K.Thankammal and on the demise of Muthu Chettiar, his widow Chellammal continued to carry on that activity. They essentially supplied gingely oil on a 15 days rotation basis. Chellammal died on 13.1.1994. None was given the right that she was exercising. The petitioner continued to provide the entire gingely oil required for the Enna Abhishekam. However, it appears that on November, 2010, the committee of Guruvayoor Devaswom met and took up an application by the WPC.37662/10 2 third respondent, which is shown to have been made on 10.1.2007. A decision is taken by the Guruvayoor Devaswom following its discussions on 12.11.2010. It stated that the 4th respondent Malathi has not shown that she is eligible for any hereditary right from Thankammal. The Board also appeared to indicate that it does not recognise any customary right for supply of gingely oil for Enna Abhishekam. However, it thought that following the earlier arrangement, the situation should continue. It recognised what it called “custom by practice” and accordingly, granted the so-called one half right of Chellammal to the 4th respondent Malathi. The fact of the matter remains that the petitioner, who was conducting the entire activity from 13.1.1994, was not even given a notice or provided opportunity of hearing as to why she should not be deprived of the right to supply one half of the gingely oil which she was doing from 1994 to 2010, on the demise of Chellammal, over and above the other half right WPC.37662/10 3 as the legal representative of Narayanan Chettiar. Not only that, having taken the view that there is no hereditary right, the petitioner had the right to be heard, if, as a matter of fact, she was supplying oil, to the exclusion of all others, from 1994 till 2010. With this, we are clear in our mind that the impugned Ext.P4 cannot stand. We hasten to add that we have not considered the effect and value of succession certificate and also other materials produced in this case because it is for the Devaswom to take decision afresh in accordance with law. Let such decision follow without fail within an outer limit of three months from now. This shall be done after granting adequate opportunity to the petitioner and the third respondent to place all relevant materials. They will also be given opportunity of personal hearing, either by themselves or to be represented by appropriate person of their choice. Until such decision is taken, the arrangement now in force on the basis of interim WPC.37662/10 4 orders passed in this case will continue. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. Sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN, Judge. kkb.21/7.