Point of Law: As per Rule 6, Committee shall not alter or cause to alter performance of customary rites and ceremonies in temple.

JUDGMENT :

[Anil K. Narendran, J.]

1. The petitioner, who is a devotee of Lord Guruvayurappan of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, which is under the management of 3rd respondent Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 3 to resume/revert to the customary practice of ‘Prasada Oottu’ on plantain leaves at Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, forthwith. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the 4th respondent Guruvayur Municipality to manage waste transportation till an alternate arrangement is made by respondents 1 to 3; and a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 2 and 3 to keep in abeyance the decision taken on 01.07.2017 to use steel plates, instead of customary plantain leaves, for ‘Prasada Oottu’, till final disposal of this writ petition.

2. Going by the averments in the writ petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by the decision taken by Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee on 01.07.2017, to use steel plates for Prasada Oottu in Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, instead of plantain leaves. Though the petitioner is seeking an order to keep in abeyance the aforesaid decision taken by the managing committee on 01.07.2017, the petitioner has not chosen to produce a copy of that decision in this writ petition. The petitioner has also not sought for a writ of certiorari to quash that decision of the managing committee. The document marked as Ext.P1 is a copy of the news item that appeared in Mathrubhumi daily dated 01.07.2017. As per Ext.P1, Prasada Oottu in Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple will be served in steel plates from 01.07.2017 onwards, using 3,000 steel plates available with the Devaswom. In addition to this, 5,000 steel plates will be purchased immediately. Sufficient number of staff has already been engaged for cleaning the plates. As per the said news item, around 5,000 to 7,000 devotees usually take Prasada Oottu during weekends. The Managing Committee has taken such a decision, since the 4th respondent Guruvayur Municipality has decided that Municipality will not remove plantain leaves from Guruvayur Temple after Prasada Oottu. The petitioner submitted Ext.P2 representation dated 03.07.2017 before the 1st respondent State, as evidenced by Ext.P2(a) postal receipt. In the writ petition, it is contended that, switching over from plantain leaves to steel plates while conducting Prasada Oottu in Sree Krishna Temple, Guruvayur, from 01.07.2017 onwards, goes against the customary practice/usage prevailing in the temple for decades. It will hurt the sentiments of the devotees. According to the petitioner, the decision taken by the Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee on 01.07.2017 to use steel plates, instead of plantain leaves for Prasada Oottu is in violation of the provisions under Sections 10(a), (b), (d) and (g) of Guruvayur Devaswom Act, 1978. In terms of those statutory provisions, the 3rd respondent Managing Committee is duty bound to follow and maintain the custom and usages in Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple and arrange for the proper performance of rites and ceremonies in the temple. The Managing Committee has to give importance to maintain hygienic conditions in the temple. It has a duty to maintain proper standard of cleanliness and purity in the offerings made in the temple. As per Section 35 of the Guruvayur Devaswom Act, Thantri is the final authority in religious matters. By the passage of time, the importance of Thantri, who is an ex-officio member of Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee, is confined to his status as Chief Priest, than having any say in the decision making process. The petitioner would also place reliance on the decision of this Court in Rajan C.K. v. State of Kerala and others [AIR 1994 Kerala 179].

3. On 31.07.2017, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Government Pleader took notice for the 1st respondent State. The lea