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. 33141 of 2010(P) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- GOPALAKRISHNAN, S/O.LATE KRISHNA MARAR, MADIYAN, MANIKOTH P.O., HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR SMT.P.K.PRIYA SRI.K.V.SREEVINAYAKAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, KOZHIKODE - 1, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, CIVIL STATION,KOZHIKODE - 1. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, KOZHIKODE - 1. 4. THE CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF TRUSTEES, SREE MADIYAN KOOLOM KSHETRAPALAKA DEVASWOM MANIKOTH P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671 329. 5. THE EXECUTIVE OFFIER,SREE MADIYAN KOOLOM, KSHETRAPALAKA DEVASWOM, MANIKOTH P.O., KASARAGOD. 6. K.V.NARAYANA MARAR,PERCUSSIONIST (VADYAM), SREE MADIYAN KOOLOM KSHETRAPALAKA DEVASOM,MANIKOTH P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671 329. 7. P.V.NALINAKSHAN,PERCUSSIONIST (VADYAM), SREE MADIYAN KOOLOM KSHETRAPALAKA DEVASWOM, MANIKOTH P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671 329. R1-3 BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN,SC,MALABAR DEVASWOM R6 & 7 BY ADVS. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER SMT.K.A.SANJEETHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/07/2011, ALONG WITH WPC. NO.1043/2011 WPC.NO.12063/2011 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 33141/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE RELINQUISHMENT LETTER OF K.V.NARAYANA MARAR AND P.V.NALINAKSHAN DATED 27/02/2007. P2: COPY OF MINUTES OF BOARD OF TRUSTEES DATED 14/06/2009. P3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 09/09/2010. P4: COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 09/10/2009. P5: COPY ISSUED BY THE ORDER DATED 01/11/2010 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT. P6: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC. NO.26995/2010 DATED 31/08/10. P7: COPY OF MINUTES OF BOARD OF TRUSTEES DATED 14/03/2009. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ----------------------------------- W.P(C).Nos.33141 OF 2010, 1043 OF 2011 & 12063 OF 2011 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 14th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan,J. These writ petitions relate to Sree Madiyan Koolom Kshethrapalaka Devaswom in Kasaragod district, which is a listed temple under the Malabar Devaswom Board. The petitioner in W.P(C).12063/11 Smt.Ranju K.V. and the petitioners in the other two captioned matters, viz., Gopakumara Marar and Gopalakrishnan, raise rival claims to be appointed as percussionists in that Devaswom. As of now, it is submitted that there is yet another person, one Nalinakshnan, who is now discharging the duties and responsibilities of a percussionist. He is not before us. We would not therefore refer to any submissions made on the question of his eligibility to continue. WPC.33141/10 & con. cases 2 We are told that the posts are hereditary and that there are only two posts. There appears to be four claimants as of now. There may be rival contentions. The authority to make the appointment is the Board of Trustees of the Devaswom. Therefore, we direct the petitioners before us to appear before the 4th respondent in W.P(C).1043/11. That authority will issue notice to the aforesaid Nalinakshnan also since he is not appearing here, though he is the 5th respondent in W.P(C). 1043/11 and has been served with notice. Thereupon, the Board of Trustees will decide any rival claim, having regard to all relevant aspects and take a decision as to who shall be appointed or permitted to continue. Such decision shall be taken within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The decision so taken shall be forwarded to the competent authority in the MDB for approval and further action in accordance with law. This shall be done within a further period of 45 days. Till such time, status quo as obtained as on today by the force of the interim orders in these cases will continue. WPC.33141/10 & con. cases 3 We clarify that if there is any grievance for any party regarding the decision of the Board of trustees or the MDB authorities, they may take recourse to available statutory or civil remedies rather than invoke Article 226 of the Constitution of India because rival claims as to offices in temples, that too, on the basis of any claim as a member of any family or group, are not matters to be resolved in writ jurisdiction. The writ petitions are ordered accordingly. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. Sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN, Judge. kkb.14/7.