IMPORTANT POINT
The duty of the Travancore Devaswom Board to arrange for the conduct of daily worship and ceremonies and festivals according to the usage, and the role of the Temple Advisory Committee in assisting the Board for the smooth functioning of temple activities and festivals.

JUDGMENT :

Anil K. Narendran, J.

The petitioners, who are devotees of Iringole Sree Bhagavathy Temple (Iringole Kavu), which is a temple under the management of the 1st respondent Travancore Devaswom Board, have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P3 communication dated 19.12.2021 of the Secretary of 1st respondent Board addressed to the 2nd respondent Devaswom Commissioner, whereby the 2nd respondent was informed about the permission granted by the Board for videography in the premises of Iringole Sree Bhagavathy Temple, following the customary practices in the said temple; a writ of mandamus commanding the 1st respondent Board to take appropriate steps to see that the public has no access in the premises of Iringole Sree Bhagavathy other than for the purpose of worship; a writ of mandamus commanding 1st respondent Board to survey the property of Iringole Kavu Devaswom and preserve the same by evicting the encroachments; a writ of mandamus commanding the 1st respondent Board to preserve the Irigole Sree Bhagavathy Temple and protect the same from encroachments and unauthorised entry, by constructing compound wall on all the four sides and erecting gates at eastern and western sides, and to take effective steps to prevent unauthorised entry of persons into the premises of Iringole Sree Bhagavathy Temple, otherwise that for worshipping; and a writ of mandamus commanding the 1st respondent Board to appoint sufficient number of security staff to prevent unauthroised entry of persons into the temple premises.

2. Going by the averments in the writ petition, the 1st petitioner was a Member of the Temple Advisory Committee of Iringole Sree Bhagavathy Temple and at present, he is a member of Mela Aswadaka Samithi, an unregistered organisation constituted by the devotees of the temple. Iringole Kavu Temple is a temple belonging to Nagancherry Mana and the Karanavar of the Mana is the Ooralan of the temple. The myth behind the temple is that the Deity in the temple is goddess Yoga Nidra or Maya, who was the baby girl replaced in place of Lord Krishna, the 8th son of Devaki and Vasudeva, to save him from Kamsa. It is believed that when Kamsa lifted the baby furiously to kill her, the baby escaped miraculously and became a supernatural power and remained in the atmosphere. At that time, all the Gods and Goddesses appeared and showered flowers and it is believed that the above baby, who was goddess Yoga Nidra or Maya, has become the principal deity of the temple and the Gods and Goddesses who have appeared for showering flowers have become the trees surrounding the principal deity, which was formed as Kavu and therefore, the temple is called Irunnaval Kavu, which was later on named as Iringole Kavu. The incarnation of Yoga Nidra or Maya which is the Goddess of Iringole Kavu is believed to be present in the temple in the form of Saraswathi in the morning, Vana Durga in the noon and Bhadra Kali during the night. Though, there were hectares of land belonging to the temple, at present Iringole Kavu temple has only an extent of around 56 Acres. Nobody knows the exact extent of property the temple has and utilising this situation several encroachments have been made at various sides of the Kavu. The Kavu is not protected on the four sides by boundary walls and though there are four entries to the temple only two are protected with gates and these two gates were installed by the devotees. The devotees were forced to install these gates to prevent unauthorised entry of persons into the Iringole Kavu Temple. There were several complaints about the same and when the Devaswom refused to heed to the request of the devotees to install gates at all four entries of the temple, the devotees themselves have erected the gates. The Devaswom has refused permission to install gates on two other entries of the temple and even though the gates are fixed the Devaswom has directed the Temp