Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 46432
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, K. V. JAYAKUMAR, JJ
COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 14200 OF 2024 | WP(C) NO. 20996 OF 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: K.P. Sudheer, Philip T. Varghese, V.M. Krishnakumar, P.R. Reena
For the Respondents: K.P. Sudheer, Philip T. Varghese, V.M. Krishnakumar, P.R. Reena
The Ombudsman for Local Self Government cannot adjudicate private disputes; its jurisdiction is limited to public misconduct, and it exceeded its authority by ordering public access to a temple pond.
Headnote:(A) Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950 - Section 62 and Kerala Land Conservancy Act, 1957 - Challenge to the Ombudsman's order regarding a temple pond and unauthorized constructions - The Cochin Devaswom Board claims ownership over the property; the Ombudsman directs public access to the pond - The court finds the Ombudsman exceeded its authority. (Paras 24, 25, 26, 28)
(B) Jurisdiction of Ombudsman - The Ombudsman cannot adjudicate private disputes or conflicts; its jurisdiction is limited to public servant misconduct and maladministration. (Paras 21, 22)
Facts of the case:
The Cochin Devaswom Board asserts ownership of a temple pond claimed by local authorities as public land, leading to conflicting petitions regarding unauthorized structures in the vicinity.
Findings of Court:
The Ombudsman’s order allowing public access to the pond was set aside due to exceeding jurisdictional power; the dispute is essentially private.
Issues: Whether the Ombudsman has jurisdiction to adjudicate ownership issues versus private disputes regarding temple properties.
Ratio Decidendi: Jurisdiction is confined to complaints against public servants for corruption, not civil disputes; the Ombudsman acted beyond authority in compelling access to the temple pond.
Result: WP
(C) No. 14200/2024 allowed; WP
(C) No. 20996/2024 dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. two writ petitions challenging the ombudsman's order on a temple pond. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. cochin devaswom board claims property rights; counterclaims about public access. (Para 6 , 7 , 10 , 12 , 25) |
| 3. court rules ombudsman overstepped authority in public access order. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 28) |
COMMON JUDGMENT
K. V. Jayakumar, J.
These two writ petitions are filed challenging the order of the Ombudsman for Local Self Government Institutions. WP(C) No.14200/2024 is filed by the Cochin Devaswom Board. WP(C) No.20996/2024 is filed by one V. D Thankachan. The issues involved in both these Writ Petitions are almost identical and therefore, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petitions by a common judgment.
2. WP(C) No.14200/2024 is taken as the lead case. The parties and the exhibits are hereinafter referred to as stated in WP(C) No.14200/2024 for the sake of convenience.
3. Brief facts necessary for the disposal of the Writ Petitions are as follows:
The writ petitioner in WP(C).No.14200/2024, Cochin Devaswom Board states that Cochin Devaswom Board is constituted under Section 62 of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950 (‘the TCHRI Act’ for the sake of brevity). All immovable properties vested in the Cochin Devaswom Board under sub-section (1) of Section 62 of the TCHRI Act shall be dealt as Devaswom properties. By virtue of Section 62 A of the TCHRI Act, the provisions of the Kerala Land Conservancy Act, 1957 were made applicable to Devaswom lands, as in the case of government land.
4. The Chirangara Bhagavathy-Vishnu Temple is situated at Chirangara Kizhakkumuri in Thrissur district and is administered by the Cochin Devaswom Board. According to Ext. P1, Thanathu Register, the temple holds properties including the temple pond located in survey numbers 401, 403, 405, 406, 407, and 424 in Kizhakkumuri Village, Mukundapuram Taluk. A portion of these properties was acquired for the widening of the National Highways under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 .
5. It is further stated that vide award No.127/2015 in LAC 190/07 dated 13.05.2015, the petitioner Cochin Devaswom Board received enhanced arbitration compensation from National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) on 19.12.2015.
6. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 14200/2024 contends that no compensation has been paid to them for the properties comprised in survey Nos. 401/4B and 403/2 of Kizhakkumuri Village, which were acquired by the National Highways Authority. These properties are recorded in the revenue records as ‘Chirangara Chira Poramboke’. The Temple Advisory Committee of Chirangara Sree Mahavishnu Temple submitted a petition before the learned Ombudsman for Travancore and Cochin Devaswom Boards, complaining that no compensation had been paid to them by the NHAI. Based on the report of the learned Ombudsman, this Court registered DBP No. 29/2017
7. As per the order dated 04.12.2017 in the said DBP, this Court directed the competent authority to take a decision on the application filed by the petitioner seeking compensation for the portion of temple chira which was acquired for the widening of the National Highway.
8. In the meanwhile, the 4th respondent, Sri. Thankachan, approached the 2nd respondent, the Ombudsman for Local Self Government Institutions and submitted Ext.P3 petition. In Ext.P3 petition, it is stated that the Cochin Devaswom Board has constructed a compound wall and gate unauthorisedly and sought for its demolition. Likewise, it is averred in the petition that the pond is illegally possessed by the temple authorities. The 4th respondent sought a further relief that the pond be opened to the public. The Ombudsman for Local Self Government Institutions, the 2nd respondent, has issued Ext.P7 order dated 19.10.2023. In the said order, it is mentioned that the Devaswom Board has admitted that the Chiangara Chira is a public pond and therefore, the Board shall not obstruct the public from taking bath in
