IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2010 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 32125 of 2010(M) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. I.B.MANOJ, S/O.BHASKARAN, IYYANI HOUSE, KURUMBILAVU P.O., THRISSUR. 2. K.G.SUNIL, S/O.GOPALAN, KODAKKATTIL HOUSE, KURUMBILAVU P.O., THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.V.BINOY RAM RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. T.K.SURYAPRAMUKHAN, S/O.KESAVAN, THE PRESIDENT, THIRUVANIKKAVU BHAGAVATHI KSHETRA KSHEMA SAMITHI, THIRUVANIKKAVU BHAGAVATHI TEMPLE, KURUMBILAVU, NOW RESIDING AT THAIVALAPPIL HOUSE, PAZHUVIL P.O., THRISSUR-680564. 2. V.GOPAKUMAR, S/O.GOPALAN NAIR, THE SECRETARY, THIRUVANIKKAVU BHAGAVATHI KSHETRA KSHEMA SAMITHI, THIRUVANIKKAVU BHAGAVATHI TEMPLE, KURUMBILAVU, NOW RESIDING AT VALLATH ATHIYARATH HOUSE, KURUMBILAVU P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680564. 3. COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY THE PRESIDENT, DEVASWOM BUILDING, THRISSUR-680 001 BY ADV.SRI. N. RAGHURAJ, SC FOR C.D.B R3 BY ADV. SMT.P.K.RADHIKA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts THOTTATHIL.B.RADHAKRISHNAN & P.BHAVADASAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ WP(C) No.32125 of 2010-M ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dated 3rd November 2010 Judgment Thottathil.B.Radhakrishnan, J. The petitioners say that they have certain grievances against the manner in which the affairs of the temple in question are being managed by the office bearers of the 'Kshethra Kshema Samithi' of which respondents 1 and 2 are shown to be the President and Secretary respectively. 2. The materials on record disclose that there is a suit filed by another devotee seeking a declaration and a mandatory injunction. The question of management of a temple and the formation of a private/public trust in that regard are not matters that should generate a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, more particularly when the Cochin Devaswom Board is not vested with any jurisdiction as regards the temple in question. The mere fact that the local people have made certain representations to the Cochin Devaswom Board, does not generate necessary jurisdictional fact to initiate WP(C) 32125/10 2 any proceedings whereby this court would issue directions to the Cochin Devaswom Board to take any statutory action. Reserving all rights of the petitioners to seek appropriate reliefs, if any, in accordance with law from the appropriate courts, this writ petition is dismissed without entering on merits. THOTTATHIL.B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sta WP(C) 32125/10 3