IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DECEMBER 2010 / 1ST POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 35973 of 2010(V) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- DINESAN ASARI T.R., S/O.T.S.REGHU, THUNDATHIL PARAMBIL, SOUTH CHITTOOR, KOCHI-682027. BY ADVS. SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND SRI.T.NIKLAVU RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, OFFICE OF THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, THRISSUR, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER/SPECIAL DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, THRISSUR. 3. THE ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, TRIPUNITHURA – 682 301. 4. THE DEVASWOM OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE DEVASWOM OFFICER, THEKKEN CHITTOOR SREE KRISHNA SWAMY TEMPLE, SOUTH CHITTOOR, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI – 682 027. R1 BY ADV. SMT.P.K.RADHIKA R2 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ, SC. FOR CDB. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs THOTTATHIL.B.RADHAKRISHNAN & P.BHAVADASAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ WP(C) No.35973 of 2010-V ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dated 22nd December 2010 Judgment Thottathil.B.Radhakrishnan, J. The petitioner seeks relief by way of direction to the Cochin Devaswom Board to constitute a regular temple advisory committee for the temple, in relation to which, this writ petition is filed. The petitioner lays emphasis on Section 76A of the Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950. If there is such a statutory obligation and if the Cochin Devaswom Board is bound to have a regular temple advisory committee within appropriate time frame, such a statutory duty cannot be postponed indefinitely. On the allegation that there is delay in exercising such authority, the learned Ombudsman for the Travancore and Cochin Devaswom Boards will have jurisdiction to look into such complaints. Equally, the learned Ombudsman will be within authority to consider any complaint regarding the functioning of the temple advisory committees also. We also find that the learned Ombudsman has given certain suggestions regarding certain works and that has been done as per Ext.P1 report. When the learned Ombudsman gives directions or suggestions regarding certain works, it is the bounden WPC 35973/10 2 duty of the Board to carry out those works in a time bound manner and any controversy regarding the time frame, is also a matter that can be considered by the learned Ombudsman. The very purpose of having an Ombudsman is to ensure that such disputes in relation to matters relating to temples and their administration by the Board can be easily resolved without accessing the jurisdiction of the High Court since the appointment of the Ombudsman is itself under the orders of the High Court. 2. Under such circumstances, we close this writ petition, requesting the learned Ombudsman to look into the grievances of the petitioner including as regards the constitution of regular temple advisory committees as also the complaint that the works are not being carried out appropriately. The Board will abide by such directions as may be issued by the learned Ombudsman. The petitioner is directed to place a copy of this writ petition along with a copy of the judgment before the learned Ombudsman. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. THOTTATHIL.B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sta WPC 35973/10 3 sta WPC 35973/10 4