Temporary Surrender Of Temple Land Not ‘Alienation’ U/S 29 HR & CE Act: Kerala High Court Upholds Madayi Temple Road Widening

The Bench noted that the project would not cause any substantial environmental damage and does not pose any real or substantial threat to the ecology, flora, or fauna of Madayipara. The judgment was delivered while disposing of two connected writ petitions challenging the Public Works Department’s (PWD) ₹1.42-crore road improvement project intended to enhance access to the hilltop temple situated on the ecologically significant Madayipara laterite plateau.

Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and Justice K. V. Jayakumar observed, “…on considering the limited extent and nature of the proposed road widening, we are of the view that the likely environmental impact is minimal and does not pose any real or substantial threat to the ecology, flora, or fauna of Madayipara. On the contrary, repairing and upgrading the existing road in accordance with IRC standards would significantly enhance safety for the devotees who frequently visit the temple, and would contribute positively to the overall upkeep and accessibility of the area”.

On the applicability of Section 29 of the Madras HR & CE Act, the Bench further observed, “Ext.R8(a) communication issued by the Chirackal Kovilakam trustee would indicate that the proposed project is intended to avoid the hardships and inconveniences of the devotees. Ext. R8(b) letter issued by the trustee of the temple dated 04.01.2025 shows that permission is granted to widen the road from 6 meters to 8.5 meters. The temporary surrender of property for the purpose of widening the road cannot be construed as a transfer of interest in immovable property, which requires prior sanction under Section 29 of the Madras HR & CE Act. Therefore, we are unable to accept the contention of the petitioner that the proposed project is legally unsustainable”.

Advocate K.M. Sathyanatha Menon appeared for the petitioner and R. Surendran, R. Ranjanie, Senior Counsels, and S Rajmohan, Senior GP appeared for the respondent.

In the matter, one of the petitioners, an ardent devotee of the temple, contended that the existing temple road, presently having a tarred width of about 3.5 metres, was proposed to be widened to 8.5 metres without acquisition of temple land or payment of compensation. It was argued that Madayipara is a biodiversity hotspot hosting rare flora, migratory birds, seasonal wetlands and unique hydrological features, and that widening the road would irreversibly damage the fragile ecosystem.

A second writ petition was filed by a nearby landowner alleging trespass into her private property for the purpose of road widening and seeking restraint against the authorities and temple management.

The State and PWD authorities submitted that the existing road was narrow and in a dilapidated condition, causing serious hardship to devotees visiting the temple. According to the respondents, the minimum width required for safe two-way traffic was 5.5 metres and the project was designed strictly in accordance with Indian Roads Congress standards.

It was further pointed out that the additional land required for widening had been voluntarily surrendered by the temple trustee, and therefore formal land acquisition proceedings were unnecessary. The authorities also assured the Court that the project would be executed without disturbing the biodiversity of Madayipara.

While permitting the project to proceed, the Court issued a series of environmental safeguards to ensure preservation of Madayipara’s ecological character. The authorities were directed to carry out the road widening strictly without disturbing ponds, water bodies or natural habitats.

Significantly, the Court ordered the contractor to undertake afforestation by planting at least 400 indigenous trees in consultation with the Divisional Forest Officer. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests was also directed to prepare a comprehensive conservation and afforestation plan for the larger Madayipara region and place it before the Court.

The Public Works Department was tasked with monitoring compliance, while local authorities were directed to ensure strict adherence to green protocols and long-term maintenance of the planted saplings.

The matter has been posted for submission of compliance reports in July 16, 2026, thereby ensuring judicial supervision over both development and conservation measures at Madayipara.

Cause Title: Vijesh C.K v. The State Of Kerala & Ors. [Neutral Citation: 2026:KER:25499]

Appearances:

Petitioner: K.M. Sathyanatha Menon, Advocate.

Respondent: .K. Mohanakannan, Mahesh V Ramakrishnan, R. Surendran, SC, S Rajmohan, Sr GP, R. Ranjanie, SC, MDB, Advocates.

Click here to read/download the Judgment