The court established that there is a rational basis for the differential treatment and that the provisions impugned do not violate Art.14 of the Constitution.

1. S.113 (2) of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950, reads as follows:

"The provisions of the Devaswom Proclamation dated the 29th day o! Makarom 1085 corresponding to the 11th day of February 1910 and the rules issued thereunder in respect of the procedure to be adopted and the mode of recovery of pattern, michavarom, renewal fees and other dues shall apply mutatis mutandis to the procedure and mode of recovery of pattern, michavarom, renewal fees and other dues relating to incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms and to the institutions whose management has been assumed under the provisions of the Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, I of 1081, or la assumed under the provisions of Part II of this Act".

and the contention before us in these two petitions is that the said sub-section in so far as they relate to Devaswoms "assumed" under Act I of 1081 is ultra vires of Art.14 of the Constitution which provides that:

"The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India".

2. It is common ground that the Devaswom concerned - the Thayankavu Devaswom - was "assumed" on grounds of mismanagement some time after 1100 under the provisions of Act I of 1081. Para.5 of both the petitions reads as follows:

"The Thayankavu Devaswom originally belonged to one Chiratamen Moosad of Olessa Desom, Ammanum Pakuthy of Kottayam District. He was the sole owner uralan. Subsequently in 1100 due to some act of mismanagement of the original owner uralan the Cochin Government placed it under a Trustee. Afterwards the Devaswom Department itself assumed management".

3. O.P. No.8 relates to survey plot No. 884/2 of the Chundal Village. The petitioner's contention in that petition is that the property belongs to him exclusively and that the Devaswom has no manner of right over it. It was, however, agreed that we need not decide the question and that as far as these petitions are concerned we may proceed on the basis that he is not the -owner but a kanom tenant.

4. O. P. No. 9 relates to survey plot Nos. 881/1,843, 729, 891, 816/2 and 1381/2 of the Chundal Village and it is filed by the petitioner in his capacity as the karanavan of his tarwad. It is admitted in his affidavit that the rights of his tarwad in the said items of property are those of a kanom tenant.

5. The rules made under the Devaswom Proclamation of 1085 in respect of the procedure to be adopted and the mode of recovery of pattom, michavarom, renewal fees and other dues appear in Appendix VI-A of the Cochin Devaswom Manual. R.6 of the said rules provides how arrears are to be recovered:

"Arrears of rent, together with interest, if any, may be recovered by the Devaswam Superintendent, or any officer empowered by him in that behalf, by the sale of the defaulter's movable property or by the placing of lands on Nadupattam or Sthirapattam".

The expression "placing a land on Nadupattam" and "placing a land on Sthirapattam" are defined in R.1 (f) and (g) as follows:

"(f) 'Placing a land on Nadupattam' means taking possession by the Sirkar of such land from a defaulter and handing it over for a fixed number of years to a third party who shall be called the Nadupattamdar.

(g) 'Placing a land on Sthirapattam' means taking possession by the Sirkar of such land* from a defaulter and handing it over permanently to a third party, 01 if the land is one already placed on Nadupattam, making the Nadupattamdar's possession of such land permanent".

Rules 7 to 25 deal with the attachment and sale of movable property, R.26 to 34 with the procedure relating to Nadupattam and Sthirapattam and R.35 to 38 with the genera] provisions regarding the recovery of arrears of interest. Of these rules, R.35 specifically provides for suits by persons aggrieved by proceedings under the rules:

"Nothing contained in these rules shall be held to prevent parties deeming themselves aggrieved by any proceedings under these rules, f