IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 26TH APRIL 2011 / 6TH VAISAKHA 1933 DBP.No. 49 of 2011() ------------------------- (IN THE MATTER OF TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD - CONSTRUCTION OF A MULTI - STORIED BUILDING AT SABARIMALA AS PART OF IMPLEMENTATION OF MASTER PLAN - TDB - REPORT (S) NO.65/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE OMBUDSMAN - SUO-MOTU PROCEEDINGS INITIATED - REGARDING.) ........ PETITIONER:- ----------------- TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY IT'S SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR,SC,TDB RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- DEPUTY DIRECTOR, LOCAL FUND AUDIT, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.R.LAKSHMI NARAYANAN BY ADV. SRI.KRISHNAKUMAR MANGOT- AMICUS CURIAE OMBUDSMAN ADV. SRI.D.ANIL KUMAR AMICUS CURIAE THIS DEVASWOM BOARD PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/04/2011, ALONG WITH DBP.NO.52/2011 AND CONNECTED CASES THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan & S.S.Satheesachandran, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = D.B.P.Nos.49, 52, 53, 54, 55, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, & 63 of 2011 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 26th day of April, 2011. Order Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J. 1.These matters are filed by the Devaswom Board seeking permission/sanction/approval for various works in connection with Sabarimala. Many of the matters relate to construction activities. Some of them are repair works. Some of them are matters which require construction of new buildings and other constructions and also laying of barricades etc. 2.We find that there is some controversy between the approaches adopted by the Forest Department, other Departments in the State Government, as also the TDB touching some of the issues. There is also a suggestion that there are certain incongruities in some of the suggestions, vis-a- DBP49/11 & con.cases -: 2 :- vis the provisions in the Master Plan. We also notice that the Forest Department stands to repeatedly say that the works are being attempted to be carried out without identifying any priority and also without settling any controversy as to the identity of the land vis-a- vis forest land where there is dispute. 3.As regards the management of all affairs in relation to the Sabarimala, with the passage of time, it was found necessary that there ought to be a comprehensive master plan for evolving the entire Sabarimala project. This is how the Master Plan came into being. There is a High Power Committee under orders of the High Court which is empowered to effectuate the Master Plan. It would not be an acceptable proposition that decisions are cropped up without a synchronized formulation of opinion by the different limbs of the establishments involved in the process of giving effect to the Master Plan. This is the reason why the High Power Committee has in it, the Principal DBP49/11 & con.cases -: 3 :- Chief Conservator of Forests and officials of different departments and also bodies like the KSEB, Water Authority etc., apart from the Additional Chief Secretary heading the High Power Committee. 4.We are sure that there is a clear line of wisdom in the judicial orders requiring cohesiveness between the Infrastructure Development Fund and the Committee which is involved in managing that and the High Power Committee implementing the Master Plan. We say this also because we notice that Sri.K.Jayakumar, presently the Additional Chief Secretary, was brought in to head the High Power Committee to implement the Master Plan during or after his appointment as the Chief Commissioner in lieu of the Board. He is also involved in the Infrastructure Development Fund. The President of the TDB is also a party to the High Power Committee and the Infrastructure Development Fund. Equally, is the Devaswom Commissioner. The Devaswom Board members have DBP49/11 & con.cases -: 4 :- also their roles to play. All these clearly indicate that decisions have to be taken in a manner which will not affect the smooth implementation of the Master Plan and this has to be ensured by a congenial decision-making process and mechanism whereby time is saved and crucial decisions are promptly taken and fruitfully implemented. 5.Having regard to the aforesaid, we direct the Secretary of the TDB to place the proposals which are submitted in all the captioned DBPs with the recommendations now made by the learned Ombudsman for the consideration of the High Power Committee which, in turn, will consider such materials and issue decision within a period of three weeks therefrom. Needless to say, the representatives of the Engineering or other Wings of the Board could also be available to explain to the HPC any clarification as may be required. In general, we also indicate that we find that DBP49/11 & con.cases -: 5 :- the controversy between the Forest Department and the TDB regarding the identity of the land has also to be appropriately settled. We, therefore, direct that the State Government, particularly the Forest Department and the TDB will ensure that there is a joint survey of all disputed lands and boundaries and thereby, identify all lands assigned to TDB under lease or otherwise under Government orders from time to time and provide a clear identity picture of the lands over which the Board will have the control. It is ordered that such survey will not stand in the way of approval of other activities to be carried out in terms of the Master Plan. It is further ordered that such survey shall be time bound and report placed before this Court within six months. DBPs ordered accordingly. Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, Judge. S.S.Satheesachandran, Judge. Sha/3004