Judgment

Arijit Pasayat, J.—Leave granted.

2. The decision rendered by a Division Bench of Kerala High Court is questioned by the appellants, primarily on the ground that it should not have entertained the original petition which was purportedly filed as public interest litigation.

3. A brief reference to the factual position would suffice. Respondent No. 1 filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (in short the ‘Constitution’) ques­tioning correctness of the decision taken by the Cochin Devasom Board (in short the ‘Board’) in granting permission to the appel­lant-society for use of Oottupura (dining hall) on the left side of the Sri Poornathrayisha Temple. Grievance of the respondent No. 1- writ petitioner was that the appellant-society was charg­ing huge charges by letting the Oottupura to various devotees for performing pooja in the temple and for permitting feasts to be organized on the Oottupura.

4. It was alleged that some officials and the appellant-society had made some secret arrangements for sharing the receipts sur­reptitiously. Grievance was made that the appellant-society was in fact operating as a parallel Board. A counter-affidavit was fi