Point of Law: Temple or its precincts cannot be made a place where political parties should look forward to give political asylum to their workers.

JUDGMENT :

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, J.

1. The petitioner, who is the hereditary trustee of Sree Emoor Bhagavathy Temple, Kallekulangara, Palakkad, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P5 notification dated 26.07.2021 issued by the 3rd respondent Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board. Ext.P5 notification, which is under challenge in this writ petition, is one issued by the 3rd respondent Commissioner, whereby applications are invited for the appointment of non-hereditary trustees of Sree Emoor Bhagavathy Temple. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the 3rd respondent and the 6th respondent Executive Officer of the 5th respondent Sree Emoor Bhagavathy Devaswom, to convene a meeting of the Board of Trustees at regular intervals and further direct them to execute and obey the decisions of the Board of Trustees, in accordance with the provisions of Ext.P1 Scheme approved by the order of the 3rd respondent dated 28.05.2018 in O.A. No. 1 of 2018 for the administration of Sree Emoor Bhagavathy Temple, Sree Thrippalur Siva Temple, Sree Thiruvara Siva Temple, Sree Chendamangalam Siva Temple and Easwaramangalam Siva Temple; a writ of mandamus commanding the 6th respondent to refrain from taking decisions unilaterally on the affairs of the temples, properties and school of the Devaswom, without consulting the hereditary trustees and a declaration that, since no finding has been entered with regard to the need and necessity of appointing non-hereditary trustees for managing the temples, properties and school of the Devaswom, the present Board of Trustees consisting of two hereditary trustees is entitled to manage the affairs of the temple.

2. On 10.09.2021, when this writ petition came up for admission, this Court admitted the matter on file. The learned Senior Government Pleader took notice for respondents 1 and 2. The learned Standing Counsel for Malabar Devaswom Board took notice for respondents 3 and 4. Respondents 5 and 6 entered appearance through counsel. The learned Senior Government Pleader and also the learned Standing Counsel for Malabar Devaswom Board sought time to get instructions. The learned counsel for respondents 5 and 6 submitted that Ext.P5 notification was issued in view of the proceedings in W.P. (C) No. 4109 of 2021.

3. The learned Standing Counsel for Malabar Devaswom Board has filed a statement dated 20.09.2021, on behalf of the 3rd respondent, opposing the reliefs sought for in this writ petition. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit dated 21.10.2021, reiterating the contentions raised in the writ petition. After the filing of reply affidavit, the 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit dated 12.11.2021, reiterating the stand taken in the statement dated 20.09.2021. Along with that counter affidavit, Ext.R3(a) communication dated 25.06.2021 of the 6th respondent Executive Officer, addressed to the 3rd respondent Commissioner pointing out the necessity for appointment of non-hereditary trustees in Sree Emoor Bhagavathy Temple is placed on record. The document marked as Ext.R3(b) is the statement showing the annual income of the temple for the year 2018 and Ext.R3(c) is a communication dated nil of the Tahsildar, Palakkad, addressed to the District Collector, Palakkad.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Senior Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 2, the learned Standing Counsel for Malabar Devaswom Board for respondents 3 and 4 and also the learned counsel for respondents 5 and 6.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that, for the appointment of non-hereditary trustees of Sree Emoor Bhagavathy Temple, the 3rd respondent Commissioner has to comply with the requirements of sub-section (2) of Section 39 of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951 (for brevity ‘HR&CE Act’). Therefore, the procedure adopted by the 3rd respondent while issuing