Temple Advisory Committees must operate strictly within the authority granted by the Travancore Devaswom Board, and deviations from prescribed conduct can lead to legal challenges and sanctions.

JUDGMENT

K. V. Jayakumar, J.

These Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Since the questions of fact and law involved in these writ petitions are the same, all these matters are disposed of by a common judgment. W.P.(C) No. 32278 of 2025 is taken as the lead case. The parties and exhibits are referred in this judgment as stated in the said Writ Petition, unless otherwise specifically stated.

2. The petitioners in all these writ petitions are Karikode Bhagavaty Temple Advisory Committee, represented by its Secretary. The petitioner states that the Committee is approved by the 2nd respondent, the Travancore Devaswom Board.

3. The petitioner states that Karikode Bhagavaty Temple has a history of around 1000 years. Initially, the said temple had a deity of Lord Shiva, and subsequently, the King of Vadakkumkoor had made the consecration of the goddess Bhagavathy (believed to be Kodungallur Bhagavathy). According to the petitioner, Kumba Bharani Maholsavam and ‘Pandalpattu’ are the main annual festivals of the temple.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no Ashtamangalaprashnam was conducted in the temple for the past several years. The petitioner committee, after getting advice from the Thanthri of the temple, has made a proposal before the 6th respondent, Sub Group Officer, Travancore Devaswom Board, for the conduct of Ashtamangalaprashnam. The 4th respondent, the Devaswom Commissioner, has accorded permission to the Committee to conduct Ashtamangalaprashnam vide Ext.P3 order dated 21.04.2025 in R.O.C. No. 7689/25/P.R.

5. Accordingly, the petitioner committee has approached Sri. Vinod Panicker Thamarassery, who agreed to conduct ‘Prashnam’ along with the necessary rituals in the temple. Thereafter, the Committee issued Ext.P6 notice inviting the participation of the public in the event. The said event was scheduled to be held on 30.07.2025. In the meanwhile, the 6th respondent issued Ext.P8 notice dated 06.07.2025 prohibiting any meeting or activities related to the conduct of the Ashtamangalaprashnam until further orders. Challenging Ext.P8 order of the 6th respondent, Sub Group Officer, the petitioner approached this Court and preferred WP(C) No. 25597 of 2025 seeking the following reliefs:

“i. Call for the records leading to Ext.P8 notice dated 06.07.2025 issued by the 6th respondent and issue a writ of certiorari, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the same and the proceedings connected with the same, in the interest of justice.

ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing 4th respondent to ensure the smooth functioning of the petitioner committee without any hindrances from any corner, in accordance with law.”

6. In the meanwhile, the Devaswom Board has issued further orders (Exts.P10 and P11). Ext.P11 is the show-cause notice, dated 23.07.2025. Ext. P9 is the copy of notice issued to the petitioner committee, requesting the members and the office bearers of the Committee to appear before the Travancore Devaswom Board for a personal hearing on 05.07.2025.

7. Thereafter, the 4th respondent, Devaswom Commissioner, issued Ext.P10 order cancelling the permission granted to the Temple Advisory Comm