The court emphasized that challenges to statutory tribunal decisions must be pursued through designated appellate channels, affirming the lack of standing of the petitioners in a writ petition.

JUDGMENT

Anil K. Narendran, J.

The 1^st petitioner is the Bharana Samithi of Sree Kanjiramattom Mahadeva Temple, the 2^nd petitioner is the deity of that temple, represented by a devotee, and the 3^rd petitioner is a member of Medanganal Mana, which is stated to have the ooralan/ooranma right of that temple. The petitioners have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, contending that the property having an extent of 3.69 Acres in Survey No.283/6 of the Todupuzha Village, which belongs to the deity of Sree Kanjiramattom Mahadeva Temple is a land exempted from the provisions of the Kerala Land Reforms Act , 1963, in view of the provisions under Section 3 (1)(x) of that Act over which the Land Tribunal has no jurisdiction and consequently Exts.P5 to P8 purchase certificates issued in respect of that property are liable to be quashed. The petitioners have sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the Revenue officials to make necessary corrections in the property covered by Exts.P5 to P8 purchase certificates, which are presently in the name of respondents 7 to 9, and include the name of the Devaswom in all Revenue Records and for other consequential reliefs, including a writ of mandamus commanding the 2^nd respondent District Collector to protect all assets belonging to Kanjiramattom Sree Mahadeva Temple as that of the Devaswom and its authorities, within a reasonable time frame.

2. On 03.03.2023, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Senior Government Pleader took notice on admission for respondents 1 to 5. Urgent notice on admission by speed post was ordered to respondents 6 to 8, returnable within three weeks.

3. Respondents 6 and 7 have filed a counter affidavit dated 31.05.2023, producing therewith Ext.R6(a) order dated 26.09.1974 of the Special Land Tribunal, Kottayam, in S.M.No.22 of 1975 in A.P.No.169 of 1971. The 8^th respondent has also filed a counter affidavit dated 05.02.2024, wherein it is stated that he does not have a claim of title or possession over the land having an extent of 3.69 Acres comprised in Survey No.283/6 in Thodupuzha Village, which is the subject matter of this writ petition.

4. In the counter affidavit dated 31.05.2023 filed by respondents 6 and 7, it is stated as follows;

“4. The Sree Mahadeva Temple, Kanjiramattom is not under the administration or supervision of the Travancore Devaswom Board or any authority under the Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act, 1950. The administration and management of the temple is apparently in private hands. The Petitioners are not entitled to invoke the public law remedy. Any grievance in regard to the alleged assets or properties of the Devaswom. Temple or deity has to be raised as private law remedy. The remedy, if at all, lies before the Civil Court and not under Article 226 of the Constitution. The Writ Petition is liable to fail on this sole ground.

5. Petitioner No.1 has no legal status or personality justifying an approach to this Hon’ble Court. Shri T.S. Rajan is not entitled in law or on facts to represent the deity of the Sree Mahadeva, Temple, Kanjiramattom. Petitioner No.3 has no locus-standiior authority to approach this Hon’ble Court by filing the above Writ Petition and seek the reliefs prayed for. The Writ Petition is an abuse of the legal process of this Hon’ble court.

6. At the outset it may be stated that we, Respondent No.6 and 7 herein, are concerned only with the property covered by Ext.P5 purchase certificate. The properties covered by Exts.P6, 7 and 8 are other persons. They are not made parties to the case