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 23RD FEBRUARY 2011 / 4TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 5766 of 2011(U) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- AMBIKA DEVI, VALIYAKATOTTU KOVILAKAM, VAIRAMKODE.P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO REVENUE (DEVASWOM) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ERANHIPALAM.P.O, KOZHIKODE -6. 3. THE COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, ERANHIPALAM.P.O, KOZHIKODE - 673 006. 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, ERANHIPALAM.P.O, KOZHIKODE - 673 006. 5. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, MALAPPURAM DIVISION, TIRUR - 676 121. 6. C. MOHANAN, SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT, OFFICE OF THE MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, ERANHIPALAM, KOZHIKODE-6. ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN,SC,MALABAR DEVASWOM FOR R2-5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN & S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No. 5766 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2011 JUDGMENT Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J. The temple in question is administered by a Board in terms of Exhibit P1 scheme. That provides for a hereditary trustee. Ambika Pulliyathiri Amma, the hereditary trustee then in office died on 18.12.2008. In Exhibit P7 judgment, this court had ordered that the MDB has to make an effort to identify the hereditary trustee who could succeed to Ambika Pulliyathiri Amma. The petitioner claims that she is eligible to be the next hereditary trustee of that temple. Her complaint is that the said issue is decided without giving her further opportunity to place materials, though she had been sick and had sought adjournments. The requirement is that any person claiming as a hereditary trustee should be given opportunity to show such eligibility and entitlement. We, therefore, order that if the petitioner places material before the competent authority, that issue would be decided appropriately notwithstanding the impugned decisions and if the MDB authorities conclude that there is a hereditary trustee, either the petitioner or any other person, for the WP(C) No.5766/11 - 2 - temple in question, appropriate orders would be issued modifying the order impugned in this Writ Petition. Let this exercise be carried out within four months from the date of receipt of all materials that may be relevant. Otherwise the impugned order will govern the field. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE vgs