SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Ker) 1182

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Anil K.Narendran, P.G. Ajithkumar, JJ.
Vijayan Unnithan - Complainant
Versus
The Devaswom Commissioner, Travancore Devaswom Board and ors.– Respondents
DBP NO. 64 OF 2024
Decided On : 05-11-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Complainant : Resmi A.
For the Respondent: G.Biju G., Sc, Sri.P.Ramachandran, Amicus Curiae

IMPORTANT POINT
The Thanthri's opinion is final regarding temple practices, and devotees cannot insist on specific offerings being included in Paditharam.

Headnote:

(A) Travancore Devaswom Manual, Volume II – Chapter II – Complaint regarding Paditharam in Muralikrishna Temple – The Ombudsman's report addressed the petitioner's grievance about the implementation of Paditharam, concluding that the Thanthri's opinion is final and that the petitioner's offerings do not necessitate a formal Paditharam. (Paras 1, 5, 7)

(B) Rights of devotees – The court clarified that a devotee cannot insist on specific nivedyams being included in Paditharam, and the Board is not obliged to accommodate individual requests for offerings. (Paras 1, 8)

Facts of the case :

The petitioner complained about the non-implementation of Paditharam in Muralikrishna Temple, asserting that he has been paying for palpayasam offerings. The Board contended that Paditharam is not applicable to the Sub-Deity.

Findings of Court :

The court found that the petitioner's requests for Paditharam were not supported by the Thanthri's opinion, which deemed such a request inappropriate.

Issues : The main issues were the rights of devotees regarding nivedyams and the authority of the Thanthri in temple rituals.

Ratio Decidendi : The court ruled that the Thanthri's opinion is decisive regarding temple practices, and individual offerings do not require formal recognition in Paditharam.

Result : The petitioner's request was declined, and the complaint was closed.

ORDER :

P.G.Ajithkumar, J.

The learned Ombudsman for the Travancore Devaswom board submitted report No.31 of 2024 in complaint No.104 of 2022. The complaint was submitted with a grievance that the direction in the order dated 08.09.2015 of the learned Ombudsman in complaint No.434 of 2014 inasmuch as the implementation of Paditharam in Muralikrishna Temple, the Sub-Deity in Kunnamthanam Madathilkavu Bhagavathy Temple is yet to be implemented. The learned Ombudsman after having a due enquiry submitted the report mooting the following questions:

    “i) Whether a devotee has any right to insist that a particular nivedyam should be included in Paditharam and whether the opinion of the Thanthri is final in regard thereto.

ii) Since the nivedyam 'palpayasam' is offered daily ever since the installation of the Upadevatha, whether it would be desirable to stop it abruptly rather than finding an alternative solution as already suggested to the Board.”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the complainant, the learned Senior Government Pleader, the learned Standing Counsel for the Travancore Devaswom Board and the learned Amicus Curiae for the Ombudsman.

3. The petitioner submitted complaint No.434 of 2014 before the learned Ombudsman. In that complaint, the learned Ombudsman submitted a report dated 08.09.2015, wherein the matter concerning the petitioner’s request to notify Paditharam in Muralikrishna Temple was relegated for the decision of the Travancore Devaswom Board. Paragraph No.4 in that report reads as follows:

    “4. With regard to the request of the complainant that Paditharam is to be provided in Muraleekrishna Temple, the Devaswom Officer informed me that proposal is already sent to the Devaswom Board and as soon as administrative sanction is obtained, it can be implemented.”

4. The petitioner would contend that the Board has not taken a decision yet and therefore he is put to much difficulty. He therefore is obligated to meet the expenses of palpayasam vazhipadu at Muralikrishna Temple. He has produced a receipt evidencing that he paid Rs.2,480/- towards the charges for palpayasam vazhipadu for the period from 01.07.2022 to 31.07.2022.

5. The Travancore Devaswom Board took a stand that Paditharam cannot be notified in Muralikrishna Temple since it is a Sub-Deity of Kunamthanam Madathilkavu Bhagavathy Temple. Along with the report of the Devaswom Commissioner opinion of the Thantri of the Temple was submitted before the learned Ombudsman. The Thantri informed that fixing of Pathivu Paditharam in the Sub-Deity as requested by the petitioner was not allowable. The petitioner has been offering vazhipadu and he can continue it as long as he can. In the affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent in this DBP the Secretary of the Board also took a similar stand. Paragraph Nos.4 to 7 in the affidavit are extracted below:

    “4. The Krishnan Nada is a newly constructed sub deity in the temple. The Palpayasam Vazhipadu is done by the complainant as a Vazhipadu in his name and birth star. He can stop the Vazhipadu at any time. All vazhipadus are not compulsory to be done every day and are not included in the Paditharam also. Even if the complainant stops the Vazhipadu, the Nivedyam and Poojas according to the Pathivu and custom of the temple will be conducted without any fail. The Tanthri categorically opined that there is no need of Pathivu or Paditharam to the sub deity as stated by the complainant. The complainant misunderstood the Vazhipadu and the rituals in the Paditharam.

5. The opinion of the Tantri is self explanatory and clearly answers the apprehension of the complainant. The Travancore Devaswom Board manages around 1248 temples. In all Temples there is Pathivu and Paditharam in which daily poojas, Masavishesham, Attavishesham and annual festivals are given in detail and the poojas are conducted without any failure. The Nithyanidanam, Masavishesham, Attavishesham and annual festival are ordinary ceremonies which are known as Pathivu. The items requir

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top