IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 8TH AUGUST 2011 / 17TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 35242 of 2010(E) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ SREE KOTTIYUR MAHAKSHETHRA PARAMPARIYA KUDUMBA SAMTHI,REP.BY ITS PRESIDENT, C.HARIDASAN,CHODATH HOUSE, MANNATHANA P.O 670 673,KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN SMT.P.G.BABITHA RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY,BOARD OFFICE, KOZHIKODE.PIN- 673 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER , MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, ERANHIPALAM,KOZHIKODE.PIN- 673 001. 3. THE CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF TRUSTEES, KOTTIYUR DEVASWOM,KOTTIYUR P.O, PIN-670 675,KANNUR DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN,SC,MALABAR DEVASWOM R3 BY ADV.SRI.P.K.SURESH KUMAR SMT.M.SINDHU THANKAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARDON 08/08/2011, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 2589 OF 2011 & WPC NO. 6244 OF 2011 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.35242/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT REPORTED IN M.F.A.NOS.74/88,208/88 AND 923/88 DATED 06/04/1994. P2 COPY OF THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT NO.J8- 7347/2010/MDB DATED 15/10/2010. P3 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT RENDERED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 08/07/2008 IN WP(C)NO.4450/2005. P4 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO-10257/10 RENDERED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R1(A) COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16/11/2006 IN MP.6/10 /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ----------------------------------- W.P(C).Nos.35242 OF 2010 & W.P(C).Nos.2589 & 6244 OF 2011 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan,J. 1.These writ petitions are filed respectively by the Sree Kottiyur Mahakshethra Paramparia Kudumba Samithi, Parassini Madappura Sri Muthappan Sthanam and Zamorin Raja of Calicut. They challenge circular J8-7347/2010/MDB dated 15.10.2010 issued by the Deputy Commissioner on behalf of the Commissioner of Malabar Devaswom Board, making reference to some of the earlier writ petitions of this Court and issuing that circular in relation to management of appointments, regularisation of appointments and also to tackle possible illegal appointments. 2.We are told that the Commissioner of the MDB is in seizin of representations by the petitioners as against the aforesaid WPC.35242/10 & con. cases 2 circular. The petitioners stand to contend that the said circular is unworkable and many of the suggestions therein are contrary to the interests of the different temples. With this, we are clear in our mind that while the MDB cannot overstep its jurisdiction in terms of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951 and while the Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner are authorised to act only in strict conformity with the statutory authority in the Act, primarily it is a matter to be considered by the Commissioner of the MDB as to whether the circular should continue to govern or whether a separate set of modalities have to be issued after hearing the petitioners. This exercise cannot be dragged on for long. For one thing, the circular in question came in October, 2010. The matters sought to be tackled by the issuance of that circular are of importance in the governance of religious and charitable endowments. At the same time, the trustees, particularly hereditary trustees, have the right to be heard in relation to any such managerial issue. We, therefore, direct that the Commissioner of MDB will hear the WPC.35242/10 & con. cases 3 representations of the petitioners herein and take a final decision on that issue within a period of two months from now, without fail. 3. Since it is stated on behalf of the petitioners that many cases of appointments and regularisation of appointments are yet to be finalised and any delay in finalising the issue would act adversely to the interest of the religious and charitable endowments, we further order that within that two months, the petitioners will not finalise any matter in relation to appointments or regularisation of appointments. We fix this time limit on the premise that the Commissioner will complete the hearing and issue orders within that time, in accordance with law. If that does not happen, the petitioners will be at liberty to proceed with regularisation of appointments already made and also make appointments in accordance with law. 4. In the event of the petitioners being aggrieved by the decision that the Commissioner may make, we deem it appropriate that WPC.35242/10 & con. cases 4 they make a representation to the Government and such representation is considered by the Government because it would essentially be a matter in the realm of policy making and affecting the authority of the trustees, including hereditary trustees, in relation to management of the temples and also the rights of persons who are appointed or are eligible to be appointed in different vacancies of posts in the service of the different religious and charitable endowments governed by the provisions of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951. We clarify that we have not expressed anything on the merits of the matter. These writ petitions are ordered accordingly, preserving all the contentions of the petitioners, if it becomes necessary for them to re-agitate the issues before the judiciary. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. Sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN, Judge. kkb.9/8.