IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 27TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).NO. 37357 OF 2010(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- T.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, S/O.LATE YASODAMMA, PUTHEN HOUSE, MATHUR AMSOM DESOM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.TOM K.THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. MALABAR DEVASWAM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONR MALABAR DEVASWAM BOARD OFFICE, PALAKKAD PIN - 678001. 2. THE ASST. COMMISSIONR, MALABAR DEVASWAM BOARD, MALABAR DEVASWAM BOARD OFFICE PALAKKAD PIN - 678001. ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN, SC-MALABAR DEVASWOM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).NO. 37357 OF 2010 :: :: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE PRESS RELEASE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS PUBLISHED IN JANAYIUGHAM DAILY DATED 09.12.2010. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE PARTITION DEED NO.761/1934 OF KOLLENGODE SRO. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.376 OF 2009 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, CHITTOOR. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE DEFENDANTS NAMELY SRI.T.KUMARAN AND RAJENDRAN IN O.S.NO.376 OF 2009. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE PROOF AFFIDAVIT FILED BY SRI.R.RAJENDRAN IN O.S.NO.376 OF 2009. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL //true copy// P.S. To Judge SK/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.37357 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of February, 2011 JUDGMENT THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. The impugned invitation of applications for the appointment of the non-hereditary trustee to the temple in question is issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Malabar Dewaswom Board acting on a decision taken by the Area committee. The decision of the Area Committee is a revisable one under the Act. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that his locus standi to challenge the impugned decision is criticized by the Board. We record the submission of the petitioner that he is entitled to challenge the decision and that the temple is not a listed temple for any action to be taken either by the Area Committee or by the Assistant Commissioner. These are not matters to be dealt with in this writ petition. That issue could be raised before the revisional authority. W.P.(C).No.37357 of 2010 :: 2 :: 3. We, therefore, order that if a decision is taken by the revisional authority, it shall be placed before the Commissioner of the Malabar Devaswom Board, who will consider it in accordance with law. Since an interim order governs the parties by now, we extend the same for five weeks, to enable the petitioner to move the Commissioner for interim relief, if so advised. We hasten to add that we have expressed no views on the merit of the claim of the petitioner. Writ petition is ordered accordingly. Sd/- (THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN) JUDGE Sd/- (S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN) JUDGE sk/ //true copy//