Case Law
Subject : Religious Law - Hindu Religious Institutions
Ernakulam, Kerala –
In a recent judgment delivered on March 11, 2025, a division bench of the Kerala High Court, comprising Justices Anil K. Narendran and Muralee Krishna S., addressed the proposed relocation of the '
The case originated as a Suo Motu proceedings (SSCR No. 59 of 2024) initiated by the High Court following a report submitted by the Special Commissioner, Sabarimala. The report highlighted a proposal by the TDB to relocate the
The Special Commissioner's report pointed out that these proposed constructions lacked prior permission from the HPC, a body crucial for overseeing developments in Sabarimala as per the Master Plan. This triggered the court's intervention to ensure that any modifications within the temple complex adhered to established protocols and safety guidelines.
During the proceedings, the court impleaded various stakeholders, including the State of Kerala, TDB officials, the High Power Committee, and police authorities, to gather comprehensive perspectives on the matter. The HPC, in its report, acknowledged that the TDB's proposals were initially not presented to them for consideration.
However, subsequent deliberations within the HPC's Technical Committee, and later by the HPC itself, considered the TDB's relocation plan for
Regarding the proposed relocation of the
The High Court, after reviewing the reports, affidavits, and submissions from all parties, focused on the statutory duties of the Travancore Devaswom Board as outlined in the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950. The court emphasized Sections 15A and 31, which mandate the Board to ensure traditional rites, proper administration, and the provision of facilities for devotees at Sabarimala.
Despite recognizing the Board's responsibilities, the court underscored the importance of adhering to the Sabarimala Master Plan and obtaining necessary approvals, especially from the High Power Committee.
In its final order, the bench stated:
> "Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and also the submissions made at the Bar, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this SSCR and HPCR(S) by permitting the Travancore Devaswom Board to relocate
The court thus granted permission for the
To ensure financial accountability, the court further directed that all expenditures related to the
This judgment underscores the Kerala High Court's active role in overseeing the administration of Sabarimala, ensuring developments are in line with established plans, safety considerations, and procedural norms, while respecting the statutory duties of the Travancore Devaswom Board.
#TempleAdminLaw #KeralaHighCourt #ReligiousSites #KeralaHighCourt
Vague 'Bad Work' Can't Presume Penetrative Sexual Assault Under POCSO Section 4 Without Evidence: Patna High Court
28 Apr 2026
Limiting Crop Damage Compensation to Specific Wild Animals Excluding Birds Violates Article 14: Bombay HC
28 Apr 2026
Appeal Limitation in 1991 Police Rules Yields to Uttarakhand Police Act 2007 on Inconsistency: Uttarakhand HC
28 Apr 2026
Nashik Court Reserves Verdict on Khan's TCS Bail Plea
29 Apr 2026
Delhi Court Grants Bail to I-PAC Director in PMLA Case
30 Apr 2026
No Historic Record of Saraswati Temple Demolition, Muslim Body Tells MP High Court in Bhojshala Dispute
30 Apr 2026
No Absolute Bar on Simultaneous Parole/Furlough for Co-Accused Under Delhi Prisons Rules: Delhi High Court
30 Apr 2026
Rejection of Jurisdiction Plea under Section 16 Arbitration Act Not Challengeable under Section 34 Till Final Award: Supreme Court
30 Apr 2026
'Living Separately' Under Section 13B HMA Means Cessation Of Marital Obligations, Regardless Of Residence: Patna High Court
30 Apr 2026
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.