IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS THURSDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2011 / 30TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 161 of 2010(T) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.M.MUKUNDAN MADAYAN S/O.KANNAN, SREEPARASSINIKKADAVU MUTHUAPPAN STHANAM, PARASSINI MADAPPURA, PARASSINIKKADAVU POST, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY SRI.T.KRISHNANUNII, SENIOR ADVOCATE. ADV.SRI. SAJU.S.A SRI.K.C.KIRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, KOZHIKODE - 673 006. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, KOZHIKODE - 673 020. 3. THE SPECIAL OFFICER SREEPARASSINIKKADAVU MUTHAPPAN TEMPLE PARASSINIKKADAVU POST, KANNUR DISTRICT- 670 563. 4. P.M.SUGUNAN, KANNOTHU THAVAZHY SREEPARASSINIKKADAVU MUTHAPPAN STHANAM PARASSINIKKADAVU MADAPPURA, PARASSINIKKADAVU POST, KANNUR DISTRICT - - 670 563. 5. P.M.LAKSHMANAN,KOVVAL THAVAZHY SREEPARASSINIKKADAVU MUTHAPPAN STHANAM PARASSINIKKADAVU MADAPPURA, PARASSINIKKADAVU POST, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 563. 6. P.M.GANGADHARAN, VADAKKE THAVZHY, PARASSINIKKADAVU MADAPURA, PARASSINIKADAVU POST, KANNUR - - 670 563. 7. K.RAVINDRAN, KANICHERY HOUSE, PARASSINIKADAVU POST, KANNUR - - 670 563. 8. M.V.SANKARAN, SANKARA BHAVANAM, VARAM P.O., KANNUR DIST 670 594. 9. E.MUKUNDAN, 'GIFT', OZHAKROM, POST KANNUR UNIVERSITY - 673 635. 10. V.RAGHAVAN, VARAYIL HOUSE, KADAMPERI, POST KANNOON, KANNUR DIST 670 650. 11. K.V.KRISHNAN, KADAVATH VALAPPIL HOUSE, POST PARASSINIKKADAVU, KANNUR DIST. - 670 563. 12. P.AJAYAKUMAR, POONHEN HOUSE, KAMBILAKADAVU, POST PARASSINIKKADAVU, KANNUR - 670 563. 13. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, KASARAGOD - 671 121. ADDL.R14 IMPLEADED : 14. PARASSINIKADAV SREE MUTTAPPAN SEVASANGHAM, REG.NO.23/2003, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT, SRI.K.V.KRISHNAN NAIR, PARASSINIKADAV POST, KANNUR. (IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT. 10.2.2011 IN I.A.NO.10299/2010) ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN,SC,MALABAR DEVASWOM FOR R1 & 2 SMT.R.RANJINI FOR R8,9,10,11 & 12 SMT.PRABHA R.MENON FOR R5-6 SRI.M.KRISHNAKUMAR FOR R5-6 SRI.A.P.CHANDRASEKHARAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R5 & R6 SRI.GOVIND K.BHARATHAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR ADDL.R14 SRI.C.P.KUNJHIKANNAN FOR ADDL.R14 SRI.S.K.MADHU FOR ADDL.R14 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.161 OF 2010 A P P E N D I X P etitioner's Exhibits : Ext.P1 : TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 9.3.2004 IN O.P.5859/2001. Ext.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER HR & CE ACT DATED 24.8.2005. Ext.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.12.2006 BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER. Ext.P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 4.9.2008 IN W.P.(C) NO.15998/2005. Ext.P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 3.8.2009 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN W.P.C.NO.26834/2009 DATED 24.9.2009. EXT.P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.C.NO.3679/2009 DATED 12.2.2009. EXT.P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT DT. 10.12.2009. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : EXT.R6A : TRUE COPY OF THE VEEKSHNAM DT. 17.4.2010. EXT.R6B : TRUE COPY OF THE SUDHINAM DT. 16.4.2010. EXT.R6C : TRUE COPY OF THE SUDHINAM DATED 17.4.2010. EXT.R6D : TRUE COPY OF THE MATHRUBHUMI DT. 15.4.2010. EXT.R6E : TRUE COPY OF THE MATHRUBHUMI DT. 17.4.2010. (TRUE COPY) P.S. TO JUDGE. K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.161 of 2010 ----------------------------------------------- Dated 21st July, 2011. J U D G M E N T Joseph, J. The Writ Petition is filed with the following prayers : (a) Call for the records leading upto Ext.P8 and to quash them by issuing a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction. (b) Pass an order staying the operation of Ext.P8 proceedings, pending disposal of this Writ Petition. 2. Briefly put the case of the petitioner is as follows : Sree Parassinikkadav Muthappan Temple is one of the old and famous Temples in North Malabar. It was declared as a public Temple. Parassinikkadavu Madappura Tharawad continued as trustee of the Temple and there are three branches in the Tharawad. There is reference to Ext.P1, which is a judgment of this Court and various other Exhibits. By Ext.P4 judgment, this Court was pleased to sustain Ext.P6 therein and it was observed that if the Commissioner deems it fit, he may constitute a committee consisting of Madayan, representatives of three families and representatives from devotees and departmental W.P.(C) 161/10 2 officers and other responsible persons of the locality for overseeing the management of the Temple in a fair and reasonable manner and for counting of Hundi collections in the presence of representatives. This Court also directed the Commissioner to arrange for recovery of arrears due to Government in reasonable instalments from the Temple. 3. Still further, the matter engaged the attention of this Court, as is evident from Ext.P7 judgment pronounced in W.P.(C) No.3679/2009. That was filed by the representative of one of the branches. In Ext.P7, it was interalia observed as follows : “As and when any committee is proposed to be constituted, the petitioner will also be issued a notice. This is recorded.” 4. It is thereafter that Ext.P8 order is issued, by which the Committee is constituted, apparently relying on Ext.P4 judgment and in terms of Ext.P4 judgment, according to W.P.(C) 161/10 3 learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2. 5. One of the contentions raised by the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the petitioner, who is a trustee was not heard. There is also a case that the other trustees were also not heard. 6. We heard the learned counsel appearing. There is no dispute that none of the trustees was heard before passing Ext.P8. No doubt, learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2 submits that trustees themselves are members of the Committee constituted as per Ext.P8. It is also pointed out that the petitioner is the President of the Committee. According to them, the other persons, who are included are not eligible and their complaint regarding the constitution and the number of members were not taken into consideration. 7. Having regard to the contentions raised, we would think that particularly, having regard to the finding in W.P.(C) 161/10 4 Ext.P7 judgment that the petitioner therein, who is none other than the 6th respondent herein, should be heard and having regard to the effect of constitution of the committee being done by ousting the trustees, we feel that Ext.P8 is liable to be set aside. No doubt, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.14 would submit that being a representative, he should also be heard. We are not inclined to accept the said request. We would think that the trustees, who are the petitioner and respondents 4 to 6 should be heard. There is no dispute that respondents 7 to 12 are members of the Committee, as constituted pursuant to Ext.P8. In such circumstances, they should also be heard. 8. Accordingly, we set aside Ext.P8. The first respondent will proceed to hear the petitioner and respondents 4 to 12 and take a fresh decision in the matter. The parties agree that they can appear before the first respondent on 17.8.2011. The petitioner and respondents 4 to 12 will appear W.P.(C) 161/10 5 before the first respondent at 11 a.m. on 17.8.2011 and the first respondent is free to proceed and take a fresh decision after hearing them also. The Writ Petition (Civil) is disposed of as above. Sd/- K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE. Sd/- M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE. tgs