The court established that the Cochin Devaswom Board has a duty to enforce access management according to earlier court decisions regarding temple property and relevant pathways.

O R D E R

P.G. Ajithkumar, J.

The learned Ombudsman for the Cochin Devaswom Board submitted Report No.38 of 2022 in Complaint Nos.162 and 169 of 2020. Based on the said report, these D.B.Ps. were initiated, respectively, in regard to Complaint Nos.169 and 162 of 2020. In the complaints, the grievance is common; irresponsible way of using gates of Pisharikovil Temple, which is under the Chakkankulangara Devaswom. The complainant Sri.Parameswaran M.N alleges in Complaint No.169 of 2020 that the persons are using the gates for their access to their respective houses and they often fail to close the gates. That resulted in stealing of 750 numbers of coconut kernels kept in the Temple compound. On 27.09.2019 there occurred an attempt to commit murder within the Temple compound. Therefore, he requested the learned Ombudsman to take action for keeping the gates closed when the Temple remains closed.

2. In Complaint No.162 of 2020 the complainant, Sri.M.N.Jayaram, who is a person using the pathway of the Temple to reach his house on the western side, alleged that despite direction by this Court to provide a pathway along land outside the temple compound wall, no action has been taken by the Cochin Devaswom Board so far. The Tahsildar, Ernakulam had measured the properties and found that there was trespass upon the Temple land. But no further action in that regard was taken. Therefore, the complainant as well as others are not able to have a convenient access to their respective houses. It is also alleged in the complaint that one key of the gate was illegally obtained by a person and that she impersonating as Geetha Warassiar has been working in the Temple and receiving salary.

3. The learned Ombudsman took the view that the matter in dispute was already dealt with by this Court in a writ petition and therefore this matter is required to be considered by this Court. Accordingly, the learned Ombudsman, without deliberating upon the issues, submitted this report. The complainant in D.B.P.No.27 of 2023 did not choose to appear before the court. The complainant in D.B.P.No.28 of 2023 has appeared before this Court and filed an affidavit producing therewith Exts.A1 to A18.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the complainant in D.B.P.No.28 of 2023, the learned Standing Counsel for Cochin Devaswom Board and the learned Amicus Curiae for the learned Ombudsman.

5. The essential grievance in both the complaints is regarding misuse of the pathway along the compound of Pisharikovil Temple. A few persons, including the complainants, are residing near the Temple premises and they are using the pathway along the Temple compound. The Temple compound is enclosed by a compound wall, and gates are provided in the compound wall. No pathway other than one along the Temple compound is available to those persons who are respondent Nos.4 to 8 in W.P.(C) No.16113 of 2014. The said Writ Petition was filed by one Sri.Dileep B alleging that no compound wall was constructed on the southern side of the Temple property and that the gates of the Temple are not being kept closed during when there has not been pooja in the Temple. The said Writ Petition was disposed of by this Court as per the judgment dated 11.03.2019. After considering the dispute with respect to the usage of pathway and the need to provide a pathway along the Temple property outside the compound wall, this Court had issued the following directions:

“12. In the said circumstance, the respondents 4 to 8 are set at liberty to move the Devaswom Board by filing an application to make available of the alternative land as mentioned above for their access, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, upon which the same shall be considered and appropriate orders shall be passed by the Devaswom Board after hearing the said respondents within a further period of three months thereafter. If the Devaswom Board decides to permit the respondents 4 to 8 to make use of alternative land as