The main legal point established in the judgment is the protection of freedom of religion and conscience under the Constitution of India.

1. The above unnumbered Writ Appeal is filed by the State of Kerala against the common order of Sivaraman Nair J. dated 20-11-1984, passed in the above proceedings. A civil miscellaneous petition praying for stay of the operation of the order of the learned Single Judge has also been filed by the State in the unnumbered Writ Appeal. The matter was moved as "urgent motion" on 21-11-1984 afternoon by the Advocate General. The State of Kerala, appellant in the unnumbered Writ Appeal, was the respondent in the Original Petitions. Petitioners in the Original Petitions are the respondents in the unnumbered Writ

Appeal. The petitioners filed the Original Petitions challenging the constitutional validity of Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions (Amendment) Ordinance, 72 of 1984 and sought stay of enforcement of the provisions of the "said enactment in the election to the Travancore Devaswom Board to be conducted on 22-11-1984. The petitioners are Hindu members of the Kerala Legislative Assembly. It is stated that they are entitled to participate in the election of one member of the Travancore Devaswom Board which is proposed to be conducted on 28-11-1984 without being required to deliver a declaration of their faith in God and profession of Hindu religion, as provided by S.4 of the Ordinance. It is stated that the said provision is an inroad into their freedom of conscience and religion guaranteed under Art.25 and 26 of the Constitution of India. After hearing counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Advocate General, Sivaraman Nair, J. held as follows:

"In the present case, the argument is that a considerable membership of the denomination, including the petitioners, are being completely ignored in the matter of setting up the Board of administration, of institutions of the denomination and therefore the restrictions imposed by S.5(2) of the Act, as amended, forge fetters into the freedom enjoined by Art.26 of the Constitution of India. This submission seems to me to be prima facie sustainable. In any case, this is a contention which requires further investigation.

The submission that the freedom of conscience and religion assured by Art.25 of the Constitution is being eroded by the requirement contained in S.5(2) of the Act, as amended, also seems to me to be a matter for serious deliberation.

I am inclined to accept the submission of the Advocate General, that the election to the Travancore Devaswom Board under S.5 of the Act may not be stayed in view of the orders of this court in other Original Petitions. But that should not justify the exclusion of conscientious objectors among the electors from exercising their right to participate in the election without filing declarations of faith. The provisions of S.5, of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950, had stood the ground for the last 34 years. Two out of the three members of the Board could have already been elected under the unamended provisions. Election of a third member under the same provisions, till such time as the validity of the provisions of the ordinance is finally pronounced upon by this court, cannot be considered to cause any serious hardship, or legal, or other problems in the working of the Board.

Considering all the aspects of the matter, it seems to me necessary to direct that the provisions of S.4 of the Ordinance, 72 of 1984, substituting S.5 of the Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, shall not be given effect to in the conduct of the election of one member of the Travancore Devaswom Board. In other words, the election of that one member may be conducted without insisting upon the Hindu members of the Legislative Assembly delivering to the person commissioned by the Governor of Kerala to preside over the meeting, a declaration signed by each of them to the effect that he believes in Godandpro jessess the Hindu religion. The result of the election will, however, he subject to further orders from this