IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2009 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 32465 of 2009(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SANKARA NARAYANAN S, RESIDING AT THEROTHU MADOM, POONITHURA , ERNAKULAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, NANDANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANDANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANDANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. V.T.K. MOHANAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/11/2009, THE COURT ON 16/12/2009 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN & P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JJ. ................................................................................ W.P.(C)No. 32465 of 2009 ......................................................................... Dated this, the 16th December, 2009 J U D G M E N T P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J: The petitioner, who proclaims himself as a devotee of Lord Ayyappa, and stated as used to have trekking the Sabarimala on almost all seasons, has filed this Writ Petition with the following prayers: “(i) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to evolve a proper Crowd Management System at Sabarimala and the trekking path without causing any difficulties for the devotees to have a proper dharsan; (ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to provide and allow the devotees to have the drinking water and food W.P.(C)No. 32465 of 2009 2 while standing in the queue. They should also be allowed to come out for urinale etc at appropriate places. (iii) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to provide sufficient number of drinking water centres in the trekking path; (iv) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to allow the devotees to enter through the front gate of Sreekovil (via. Balikalpura), whenever the Fly over is getting jammed or allow the devotees to have the darsan through both the ways. (v) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to provide an exclusive timing for the darsan of the temple employees, Guards and the Police Officers instead of allowing them to attend the important Poojas during the Peak hours; and (vi) to issue such other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper. “ W.P.(C)No. 32465 of 2009 3 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner, with reference to the averments in the Writ Petition, submitted that the grievance and the anxiety exposed by the petitioner is in respect of the absence of proper Crowd Management System and that the pilgrims are made to wait for hours in the queue, along the trekking path from Pamba to 'Sannidhanam', confining themselves in barricades installed on the way, that too, without any facility for drinking water and even to attend the primary calls of the nature. It is alleged that no steps have been taken by the respondents by way of remedial measures and the petitioner apprehends more severe hardships this year as well, in view of possible increase in the number of pilgrims to visit 'Sabarimala ' this season. 3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Devaswom and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent/ State vehemently opposes the reliefs prayed for, pointing out that the averments and allegations raised in the Writ Petition are devoid of any merit or bonafides; that earnest arrangements have been made to manage the crowd W.P.(C)No. 32465 of 2009 4 in a systamatic and scientific manner, providing maximum comfort and convenience to the pilgrims and sufficient arrangements have been made on the way, enabling the pilgrims to have drinking water, also providing urinals at several places. It is also stated that there is absolutely no pith or substance in the insinuation made by the petitioner and that the same does not deserve to be considered, as they are simply wild allegations. It is also pointed out that the petitioner has chosen to approach this Court by filing the Writ Petition in the 11th hour, i.e. on 12.11.2009 when he was very much aware of the fact that the temple will be opened for 'Mandalam-Makaravilakku' festival on 16.11.2009. The learned Government Pleader supports this version. 4. We find considerable force in the submissions raised by the learned Standing Counsel as well as the Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. It is stated by the petitioner in the opening paragraph of the Writ Petition that the petitioner had brought similar grievances to the notice of this Court, the last time as well, but by that time, the matter had become W.P.(C)No. 32465 of 2009 5 infructuous. The petitioner has not given any particulars of the efforts or attempts made by him to alert the respondents in this regard; nor has he chosen to produce any materials to show that he had approached either the Devaswom authorities or Governmental authorities, pointing out the specific instances, where immediate attention had to be given for redressal of the grievances. There is also no case for the petitioner that he had approached the 'Ombudsman' appointed by this Court in connection with the affairs of the Devaswom, pointing out the hardships being felt by the pilgrims and suggesting any remedial measures. When the petitioner contends that similar grievances were projected and brought to the notice of this Court last year as well, which however turned to be futile as belated, the efforts and enthusiasm ought to have been much more this year and the petitioner, if actually aggrieved in any manner, ought to have approached the Devaswom/departmental authorities or the Ombudsman much earlier and if the above attempts were not fruitful in any manner, he ought to have approached this Court, well in advance, so as to ascertain and W.P.(C)No. 32465 of 2009 6 analyse the actual facts and figures. On the other hand, the petitioner has simply barged into this Court on the eve of opening of the temple for the 'Mandalam' festival ( just four days prior to the opening of the temple). The course and conduct pursued by the petitioner cannot but be deprecated. This Court does not find any merit or bonafides in the case put forth by the petitioner. The present Writ Petition is not at all a 'Public Interest Litigation' and the idea of the petitioner might be to project himself before the public and the mass media. In the above circumstances, no interference is called for. The Writ Petition fails and the same is dismissed, however without cost. P.R. RAMAN, JUDGE. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk