Back
1999 Supreme(Ker) 649
High Court of Kerala
Arunachalam Chettiar Lakshmanan, S. Sankarasubban, JJ.
State of Kerala - Appellant
Versus
Gopalakrishnan Nair & Ors - Respondent
C.M.P. No. 37116 of 1999
Decided On : 10-09-1999
The main legal point established is that the powers to appoint a new counsel and select the Melsanthi for the temple are vested in the Committee as per the Guruvayoor Devaswom Act.
Headnote:
Commissioner - Appointment of Counsel - Guruvayoor Devaswom Act, Sections 2(c), 3, 4, 6, 7, 11, 12, 14, 17, 19, 35 - The court held that the Commissioner and the Administrator have no authority to exercise the powers and functions of the Committee under the Guruvayoor Devaswom Act. The Committee, consisting of specific members, has the power to appoint a new counsel and select the Melsanthi for the temple.
Fact of the Case:
The Commissioner and Administrator sought permission to appoint a new counsel for Guruvayoor Devaswom and select the Melsanthi for the temple. The court found that they lacked the authority to exercise the powers of the Committee.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Commissioner and Administrator did not have the authority to appoint a new counsel or select the Melsanthi, as these powers were vested in the Committee under the Guruvayoor Devaswom Act.
Issues: The main issue was whether the Commissioner and Administrator had the authority to appoint a new counsel and select the Melsanthi for the temple.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the powers to appoint a new counsel and select the Melsanthi were vested in the Committee as per the specific sections of the Guruvayoor Devaswom Act.
Final Decision: The court directed the Committee, consisting of specific members, to exercise the powers to appoint a new counsel and select the Melsanthi for the temple.
AR. Lakshmanan, Ag. C.J.
1. C.M.P.37116/1999 is filed by one K. Mohandas, Commissioner, Guruvayoor Devaswom to permit the Guruvayoor Devaswom to appoint a new counsel in the place of Shri. K. Radhakrishan for conduct of the cases of the Devaswom. Since the Commissioner, Guruvayoor Devaswom was not a party to the Original Petition No. 16192/1999 permission is sought now to implead himself as a party, which was ordered in C. M. P. 34451/1999. It is stated in the affidavit that in the light of certain developments in relation to the conduct of cases on behalf of the Guruvayoor Devaswom it has become necessary to change the counsel representing the Devaswom and appoint a new counsel to represent the Devaswom in courts and to advise the Devaswom on legal matters. While going through the affidavit, we found certain derogatory remarks against the present counsel Sri. K. Radhakrishnan. It is stated by Mr. K. Mohandas, the Commissioner that the said Shri K. Radhakrishnan is not able to handle effectively the cases entrusted to him by the Devaswom. Similar remarks have also been made by Dr. V. M. Gopala Menon, the Administrator in the affidavit sworn to by him on 1-9-1999 against Shri K. Radhakrishnan. We are of the opinion that the said derogatory remarks are totally unwarranted and also against facts. Shri K. Radhakrishnan has been appearing as a counsel before this court on several occasions and has very effectively and efficiently handled the cases on behalf of the Guruvayoor Devaswom and on behalf of other litigants. At this juncture, the learned Special Government Pleader came forward to delete those derogatory remarks and accordingly he deleted those offending portions against Shri. K. Radhakrishnan in para.5 of the affidavit filed by Mr. Mohandas and the derogatory remarks made in Para.2 of the affidavit filed by Dr. Gopala Menon.
2. We shall now come to the prayer asked, for by the Commissioner and the Administrator to permit the Guruvayoor Devaswom to appoint a new counsel in the place of Shri. K. Radhakrishnan for conduct of the cases of the Devaswom. In our opinion, neither the Commissioner nor the Administrator of the Devaswom has any authority to exercise the powers and functions of the Committee. The "Committee" is defined under S.2(c) of the Guruvayoor Devaswom Act, hereinafter referred to as "the Act", which means the Guruvayoor Devaswom Managing Committee constituted under S.3. S.3 deals with incorporation of the Committee. Under S.3, the administration, control and management of the Devaswom shall be vested in a Committee constituted in the manner hereinafter provided. S.4 deals with composition of the Committee. S.4(1) reads thus:-
"4. Composition of Committee:- (1) The Committee shall consist of the following members, namely: -
(a) the Zamorin Raja;
(b) the Karanavan for the time being of the Mallisseri Illom at Guruvayoor;
(c) the Thanthri of the Temple, ex officio;
(d) a representative of the employees of the Devaswom nominated by the Hindus among the Council of Ministers;
(e) not more than five persons, of whom one shall be a member of a Scheduled Caste, nominated by the Hindus among the Council of Ministers from among persons having interest in the Temple".
It is not in dispute that the entire Committee which was constituted in July, 1996 is not in office except the three members, viz., (a) the Zamorin Raja, (b) the Karanavan for the time being of the Mallisseri Illom at Guruvayoor, and (c) the Thanthri of the temple, ex officio. It is also not in dispute that the representative of the employees of the Devaswom nominated by the Hindus among the Council of Ministers and the five persons nominated by the Hindus among the Council of Ministers from among persons having interest in the Temple have resigned their posts. At present the Committee consists of only the following three members, viz., the Zamorin Raja, the Karanavan for the time being of the Mallisseri Illom at Guruvayoor and the Thanthri of the Temple, ex of
