Violation of tender conditions by the kuthaka holder requires corrective actions from the Board, emphasizing strict adherence to established guidelines.

JUDGMENT :

Muralee Krishna, J.

The Special Commissioner, Sabarimala, has filed this report based on an enquiry conducted by the Superintendent of Police, Devaswom Vigilance Wing, on a report submitted by the duty Magistrate, Pamba, regarding the sub-lease of Stall No.113 at Pamba Manappuram during Mandala Makaravilakku festival season of 1200ME (2024-25). A report dated 03.01.2025 of the Superintendent of Police, Chief Vigilance and Security Office, Thiruvananthapuram of Travancore Devaswom Board and the report dated 22.12.2024 of the duty Magistrate, Pamba, addressed to the Vigilance Officer, Pamba, Travancore Devaswom Board, are enclosed with the report of the Special Commissioner. In the report dated 28.12.2024, the 6^th respondent, Chief Vigilance and Security Officer, has stated that the ’kuthaka right’ in respect of Stall No.113 was for an area of 4x5 m, i.e., 20 Sq.ms. But the Kuthaka holder encroached upon more area, constructed their stall, dividing it into two different parts and sublet it to two different persons, i.e., one to Sri. Arun Suresh and another to Sri. Baiju.

2. 20.01.2025, when this matter was taken up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board sought time to get instructions. The learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board made available for the perusal of this Court the Kuthaka certificate and agreement in respect of Stall No.113 at Pamba Manappuram. The report of the 5^th respondent Executive Officer, furnishing the details of Sri.Arun Suresh and Sri. Baiju, who conducted the stalls in the area covered by that Kuthaka certificate, was directed to be placed on record.

3. On 27.01.2025, when this SSCR came up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board submitted that a copy of the Kuthaka certificate, Kuthaka agreement, notice dated 15.01.2025 issued to the Kuthaka holder and the reply received from the Kuthaka holder are placed on record along with a memo. The additional 7^th respondent was suo motu impleaded based on the Kuthaka agreement, etc., placed on record by the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board. The learned Senior Government Pleader entered appearance for respondents 1 and 2, and the learned Standing Counsel for respondents 3 to 6. Urgent notice was ordered by speed post to the additional 7^th respondent returnable within three weeks.

4. On 20.02.2025, the additional 7^th respondent entered appearance through a counsel, who sought one week time to file counter affidavit.

5. On 10.03.2025, the description of the 2^nd respondent was suo motu corrected. The additional 7^th respondent filed a counter affidavit dated 01.03.2025, producing there with Ext.R7(a) document. Paragraphs 2 to 6 of that counter affidavit read thus;

"2. It is submitted that, the person named “Suresh” to whom it is alleged that the 7^th respondent has sub-let his tender are partners for the past many years. It is submitted that, as per the rules the maximum number of tender a person can take is three and the 7^th respondent herein is already having three tenders. It is submitted that, one among the above-mentioned three tenders is the tender under SI. No 113 in which the alleged incident has taken place. The true copy of the acknowledgement receipt showing that the SI. No. 113 tender has been taken place. The true copy of the acknowledgement receipt showing that the Sl.No.113 tender has been taken by the 7^th respondent is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit-R7(a).

3. It is submitted that, since the 7^th respondent herein and the Suresh are partners, the amount required to acquire the tender was equally shared between