Review under Order XLVII, Rule 1 is limited to correcting apparent errors, and not for rehearing cases on merits, reaffirming the authority of the Devaswom Board over temple management.

ORDER :

Anil K. Narendran, J.

The 4^th respondent in W.P.(C)No.2614 of 2016 has filed this review petition, invoking the provisions under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking review of the judgment of this Court dated 12.02.2025 in that writ petition. The said writ petition was one filed by the 1^st respondent herein- petitioner, which is the Temple Advisory Committee of Sree Kollakal Poroor Madom Devi Temple, a temple under the management of the 2^nd respondent Travancore Devaswom Board, seeking the following reliefs;

“i. To declare that the Ext.P2 compromise decree is not binding on the deity, petitioner Samithi or the devotees of the temple; ii. a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 3 to permit the petitioner to perform the Paraeduppu Ezhunillippu of the Kollakal Poroor Madom Devi Temple scheduled to be started from 8^th of Makaram Malayalam month by issuing receipts get sealed by the Devaswom Board;

iii. a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 3 to ensure that the Jeevatha belongs to the temple alone shall be used to take Devi in procession at Paraeduppu Ezhunnullippu;

iv. a writ of mandamus to ensure that the entire income from the Paraeduppu Ezhunnullippu of the Devi shall be deposited in the Devaswom to be accounted and to be utilized for the development of the temple.”

2. That writ petition was disposed of by the judgment dated 12.02.2025, making it clear that in view of the provisions contained in the Bye-law (Rules) framed under sub-section (3) of Section 31A of the TRAVANCORE-COCHIN HINDU RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS ACT , 1950, the Kshethra Upadeshaka Samithi (Temple Advisory Committee) of Sree Kollakal Poroor Madom Devi Temple cannot either collect or appropriate the amounts paid by the devotees for Paraeduppu, in connection with Paraeduppu Ezhunillipu. Similarly, the 4^th respondent Kadasseri Munnila NSS Karayogam (petitioner herein) cannot also collect or appropriate any amount paid by the devotees for Paraeduppu, in connection with Paraeduppu Ezhunillipu. Any collection of money from the devotees for Paraeduppu can only be against sealed receipts issued by the 2^nd respondent Assistant Devaswom Commissioner (3^rd respondent herein) and the amounts collected from the devotees will have to be credited into the account of the Devaswom. Based on the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Kshethra Upadeshaka Samithi (Temple Advisory Committee) of Sree Kollakal Poroor Madom Devi Temple (1^st respondent herein) relief Nos.(i), (ii) and (iv) in W.P.(C)No.2614 of 2016 was dismissed as withdrawn, without prejudice to the right of the Samithi to move the appropriate forum.

3. Heard the learned Senior Counsel for the review petitioner-4^th respondent, the learned counsel for the 1^st respondent-writ petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board for respondents 2 to 4 and 13.

4. The learned Senior Counsel for the review petitioner-4^th respondent would contend that the judgment dated 12.02.2025 in W.P.(C)No.2614 of 2016 is liable to be reviewed since the directions contained therein will deprive the right of the review petitioner to conduct Paraeduppu Ezhunillippu of Kollakal Poroor Madom Devi Temple, as conferred by Ext.P2 compromise decree in A.S.No.231 of 2005 on the file of the Additional District Court–I, Mavelikkara. There is error apparent on the face of record and as such the said judgment dated 11.02.2025 is liable to be reviewed.

5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the 1^st respondent-writ petitioner Kshethra Upadeshaka Samithi (Temple Advi