The court underscored its jurisdiction to safeguard temple properties, emphasizing trustees' duty to protect against encroachment and unauthorized use.

JUDGMENT

Anil K. Narendran, J.

The petitioner, who is stated to be the President of Kamba Parambu Mojana Committee, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India , seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 5 to ensure that the assets of Mele Thrikovil Sreeramaswamy Temple and Sree Vayilyam Kunnu Bhagavathy Temple, which are controlled institutions under the Malabar Devaswom Board, are protected by constructing a compound wall and removing the encroachment made by the 6^th respondent. The further reliefs sought for is a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 5 to ensure that the temple ground is not used to park the vehicles brought for repair at the nearby workshop and also to ensure that the temple premises are not used for the sale of banned substance and for conduct of liquor parties; a writ of mandamus commanding the 1^st respondent to consider Ext.P2 representation dated 29.05.2015 within a time frame; and a writ of mandamus commanding the 3^rd respondent to consider Ext.P3 representation dated 12.12.2014 within a time frame after affording an opportunity of being heard the petitioner or the complainant therein.

-

2. The grievance of the petitioner, which is highlighted in this writ petition, is that the properties of Mele Thrikovil Sreeramaswamy Temple and Sree Vayilyam Kunnu Bhagavathy Temple have been encroached upon for construction of a Kalyanamandapam by the 6^th respondent and no permission from any authorities obtained prior to the construction. A road has been cut open through the temple properties, which is used by the public. A nearby workshop uses the temple ground to park the vehicles brought for repair and all the repair works are being carried out at that place. To make things worse, the temple ground is used for sale of banned substances and at late night, liquor party is a common sight. Pointing out the aforesaid fact, the petitioner submitted Ext.P2 representation dated 29.05.2015 before the 1^st respondent Commissioner.

3. On 01.07.2015, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Standing Counsel took notice for respondents 1 to 3. Urgent notice by speed post was ordered to respondents 4 to 6.

4. On 21.10.2015, when this writ petition came up for consideration, this Court passed the following order;

-

“The learned Standing Counsel for Malabar Devaswom Board had shown us the copy of the communication dated 26.08.2015 from its Commissioner to the Executive Officer, Sree Vayilyam Kunnu Bhagavathy Devaswom. We are assured that the directions of the Commissioner to carry out the measurements would be completed within another three weeks from now, if not already completed. Since that communication is that of August, 2015, the Malabar Devaswom Board is directed to place its further action taken report in this regard. Respondents 4 and 5 are directed to ensure that the directions of the Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom are complied with and reported back to the office immediately.

Any construction activity will be subject to further orders of this Court.”

5. Pursuant to the direction contained in the order dated 21.10.2015, a report dated 24.11.2015 of the 4^th respondent Executive Officer is placed on record, which reads thus;

“1. I am the 4^th respondent in the above writ petition (Civil). This Hon’ble Court vide order dated 21.10.2015 directed the 4^th and 5^th respondents to ensure that the directions of the Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board in the communication dated 26.08.2015 to be complied with and reported back to the office immediately. In fact, I received a communication from the Assistant Commissioner, Malabr Devaswom dated 24.08.20