Devotees cannot invoke writ jurisdiction for management issues of a temple not under the claimed Board's administration.

Anil K. Narendran, J.

The petitioners, who are the devotees of Oachira Parabrahma Temple, which is a temple under the management of a trust by name Oachira Parabrahma Trust, have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a mandamus commanding the 1^st respondent, who is the Administrator appointed in terms of the order of the Apex Court dated 03.12.2024 in Civil Appeal No.13708-709 of 2024 arising out of the order of a learned Single Judge of this Court dated 07.03.2023 in I.A.No.5 of 2022 in R.F.A. No.562 of 2010, to include the name of the petitioners in the voters’ list for the Pothubharana Samithi election of Oachira Parabrahma Temple. The petitioners have also sought other consequential reliefs.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board and also the learned Senior Government Pleader for respondents 4 and 5.

3. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court in respect of the issue in question, on a bonafide belief that Oachira Parabrahma Temple is a temple under the management of Travancore Devaswom Board and it is in such circumstances that the Devaswom Commissioner, Travancore Devaswom Board was arrayed as the 3^rd respondent.

4. The learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board would submit that there are two temples under Oachira Devaswom, under the management of the Board, in which Mahalakshmi, Lord Ayyappa and Nagaraja are the deities. The Board has no connection whatsoever with Oachira Parabrahma Temple, which is under the management of Oachira Parabrahma Trust.

5. The learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board would also point out the judgment of this Court dated 17.02.2025 in W.P.(C)No.5853 of 2025. Paragraph 5 to 9 and also the last paragraph of that judgment reads thus;

“5. Oachira Parabrahma Temple is not a temple under the management of the 2^nd respondent Travancore Devaswom Board. It is a temple managed by Oachira Parabrahma Trust. Regarding framing of a scheme for the administration of that temple, under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 , O.S.No.1 of 2006 is pending before the Additional District Court-I, Kollam, in which a preliminary decree has already been passed on 09.04.2010. By that preliminary decree, it is declared that a scheme is to be settled for the 1^st defendant Oachira Parabrahma Temple and for all assets and institutions under the same, including Oachira Parabrahma Speciality Hospital. The parties to the suit were called for to file draft scheme for the 1^st defendant temple covering all institutions in existence and to be established in future, under the scheme, within three months from the date of the preliminary decree. In that preliminary decree, it was made clear that the administration of the temple and other institutions will continue, till the scheme is framed, as per the present bye- law. The present managing body under the bye-law is allowed to meet the expenses for the effective management of the 1^st defendant temple and all institutions under the same, existing and to be established in future, as per the provisions in the existing bye-law, until the scheme is framed. In the preliminary decree, it was made clear that the restrictions imposed in that regard during the pendency of O.S.No.1 of 2006 will be removed with effect from 01.06.2010.

6. The preliminary decree passed by the Additional District Court-I, Kollam in O.S.No.1 of 2006 was under challenge before this Court in R.F.A.No.560 of 2010. That first appeal was disposed of by the judgment dated 02.03.2020, without any interference in th