Back
2012 Supreme(SC) 2720
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.M. LODHA, A.K. PATNAIK, JJ.
SRI MARTHANDA VARMA AND ANR. Petitioners
Vs.
STATE OF KERALA & ORS. - Respondents
Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).11295/2011 WITH SLP(C) NO. 12361 of 2011, SLP(C) NOS. 17081-17082 of 2011, W.P. (C) No. 518 of 2011
Decided On : 12-12-2012
Mr. Gopal Subramanium, Sr. Adv. (Amicus Curiae), Mr. Aporva Kurup, Adv., Mr. Ardhendumauli Kumar Prasad, Adv., Mr. Nishit Agrawal, Adv.,
For the Petitioners: Mr. K.K. Venugopal, Sr. Adv., Mr. Krishnan Venugopal, Sr. Adv., Mr. Parameswaran Nair, Adv., Mr. Shyam Mohan, Adv., Ms. Ashwati Balraj, Adv., Mr. B.V. Deepak, Adv. For M/S. T.T.K. Deepak & Co., Mr. M.K.S. Menon, Adv., Mr. Robin V.S., Adv., Ms. Monika Rai, Adv., Ms. Asha Gopalan Nair, Adv., Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Dhruv Mehta, Sr. Adv., Mr. P.B. Suresh, Adv., Mr. Vipin Nair, Adv. Adv., Mr. T.K. Anandpadmanabhan, Adv., Mr. Udayatiya Banerjee, Adv. For M/s. Temple Law Firm, Ms. Samridhi Sinha, Adv., Mr. M. Khairati, Adv., Ms. Rashmi Malhotra, Adv., Ms. Supriya Jain, Adv. For, Mr. D.S. Mahra, Adv., Mr. Ramesh Babu, Adv., Ms. Sana Hashmi, Adv. for, Ms. Liz Mathew ,Adv., Mr. R. Sathish, Adv., Mr. V. Ramasubramanian, Adv., Mr. C.K. Sasi, Adv., Mr. Sajith. P, Adv., Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, Adv., Mr. Deepak Dixit, Adv., Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, Adv., Mr. Jaikriti S. Jadeja, Adv., Mr. K. Vijay Kumar, Adv., Mr. Sivan Madathil, Adv., Ms. Usha Nandini V., Adv., Mr. Biju P. Raman, Adv., Mr. Vishnu Shankar, Adv., Mr. Sanand Ramakrishnan, Adv.
The court has the authority to provide specific directions and timelines for the implementation of recommendations and the appointment of officials based on expert reports and representations received.
Headnote:
Interim Report - Expert Committee - The court provided further directions in respect of the report submitted by the Amicus Curiae, addressing various aspects such as identification of ornaments, strengthening of specific areas, inventorization of items, storage of data, implementation of security measures, appointment of an auditor, and religious practices.
Fact of the Case:
The court provided further directions in respect of the report submitted by the Amicus Curiae, addressing various aspects such as identification of ornaments, strengthening of specific areas, inventorization of items, storage of data, implementation of security measures, appointment of an auditor, and religious practices.
Finding of the Court:
The court provided specific directions and timelines for the implementation of various recommendations contained in the Expert Committee's Interim Report, as well as the appointment of an auditor and the consideration of representations received by the Amicus Curiae.
Issues: Implementation of recommendations from the Expert Committee's Interim Report, appointment of an auditor, consideration of representations received by the Amicus Curiae.
Ratio Decidendi: The court directed the State Government to implement the recommendations contained in the Expert Committee's Interim Report, appointed an auditor for the Temple accounts, and considered representations received by the Amicus Curiae.
Final Decision: The court provided specific directions and timelines for the implementation of various recommendations contained in the Expert Committee's Interim Report, as well as the appointment of an auditor and the consideration of representations received by the Amicus Curiae.
ORDER :
Let copy of the VIth Interim Report of the Expert Committee dated December 10, 2012 be provided to the concerned parties.
2. In continuation of our earlier orders, the following further directions are given in respect of the report dated November 1, 2012 submitted by the learned Amicus Curiae Mr. Gopal
Subramanium, Senior Counsel :
(1) With reference to para 3(a) of the report, the Tantris may identify from photographs, the ornaments including utensils, deepams as well as other pathrams which can be used for alankara and pooja and the report be submitted to this Court.
(2) The strengthening of Kallaras A, C, D, E and F shall take place in accord with the suggestions given in para 6 at page 66 of the above report.
(3) The inventorisation of certain items in respect of utensils and ornaments used for the purpose of worship in Kallaras D, E and F shall be done by Tantris and those utensils and ornaments shall not be touched by others for invertorisation. In this regard, suggestions given in para 7 of the report are accepted and shall be followed accordingly.
(4) As regards storage of data, the suggestions given in paras 8, 9 and 10 of the report are accepted, save and except that in place of Mr. C. Karthikeyan Nair, the present Administrative Officer of the Expert Committee, the Secretary to the Government of Kerala, Devasom shall be one of the members authorised to jointly operate the vault as suggested in para 8 of the report. This arrangement is no reflection on the conduct of Mr. C. Karthikeyan Nair in any manner whatsoever and has been so made for the sake of convenience only.
(5) The suggestions given in paras 15 and 16 of the report with regard to registers and records are accepted.
(6) Time of five months is given to the State Government from today to implement the various recommendations contained in Annexure 6 of the Expert Committee’s Interim Report V with regard to additional security measures.
(7) Time for inventorisation is extended for a further period of nine months from today.
(8) The suggestion in para 32 of the report for appointment of Shri Gopalakrishnan (of M/s Srinivasa & Krishna, Chartered Accountants) as the Auditor of the Temple accounts is accepted. The Auditor will assist the Executive Officer by regularly placing the Temple accounts before him for review and further scrutiny.
(9) We record and accept the statement of Mr. K.K. Venugopal, learned senior counsel for the petitioners in S.L.P. (Civil) No. 11295 of 2011 and S.L.P. (Civil) No. 12361 of 2011, that all requisite religious practices are being followed. The suggestions given in para 36 and other paras of the report regarding upachara, pooja, introduction of Vedic mantras and such other activities for the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple shall be kept in mind by all concerned.
(10) The representations received by learned Amicus Curiae from various groups during his visit to the office of the Expert Committee shall be placed before Justice M.N. Krishnan (Retd.), the Co-ordinator of the Overseeing Committee who will consider those representations in consultation with the Executive Officer.
(11) As regards cleaning of Padmatheertham and Mitranandapuram tanks, the suggestions given in sub-para (46) of para 39 of the report are accepted. The Government of Kerala and Corporation of Trivandrum shall ensure that these two tanks are cleaned periodically and at least once in three months.
3. As regards other suggestions given in the above report, Mr. K.K. Venugopal, learned senior counsel for the petitioners in S.L.P. (Civil) No. 11295 of 2011 and S.L.P. (Civil) No. 12361 of 2011, prays for time to look into them.
4. List the matter on January 16, 2013 at 3 p.m.
