IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Ziyad Rahman A.A., K. V. Jayakumar, JJ
Vijayan Unnithan – Appellant
Versus
Travancore Devaswom Board – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 14593 OF 2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition seeks mandamus for temple paditharam and pooja relief. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. counsel submit on representation authority and forum. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court directs fresh representation to board for time-bound disposal. (Para 5 , 6) |
K. V. Jayakumar, J.
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:
“(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ ,order or direction , directing 1st respondent to consider and take appropriate action on Exhibit P2 request dated 17.01.2026 given by the petitioner ;
(ii) direct the 1st respondent to take adequate steps to fix the Paditharam for the Upadevatha temple of Lord Muralee Krishna as agreed upon at the time of installation ;
(iii) direct the 2nd respondent to relieve the petitioner from the financial burden of bearing the Nithya Pooja expenses by taking over the responsibility of daily pooja for the Upadevatha temple,”
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P2 representation before the Secretary, Travancore Devaswom Board seeking to take necessary steps to fix ‘Paditharam’ for the Upadevatha Temple of Lord Muraleekrishna. The said representation has not been considered by the respondents.
3. The learned counsel submitted that he will be satisfied with an order directing the Board to consider Ext.P2 representation submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law.
4. In response, the learned Standing Counsel for the Board submitted that Ext.P2 representation was submitted before the Secretary of TDB who has no power to consider such representations. It is for the Board to consider such representations and to pass appropriate orders.
5. Heard Smt. Resmi A, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. G. Biju, the learned Standing Counsel for the Board.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced and the materials placed on record, we are of the view that ten days’ time can be granted to the petitioner to file a fresh representation addressing the Board. If such a representation is submitted, the Board shall consider and dispose of the same, as expeditiously as possible, within an outer limit of three months from the date of this judgment.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.