No Unfettered Power To Devaswom Board To Assume Management Of Temples: Kerala High Court Quashes Communications
The petition was filed by the Ernakulam Tirumala Devaswom, a denominational temple belonging to the Gowda Saraswath Brahmin Community.
The Kerala High Court has held that the Cochin Devaswom Board has no unfettered power to assume the management of an institution, and quashed communications issued to the Ernakulam Tirumala Devaswom suggesting proceedings for assumption of its management.
A Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and Justice K. V. Jayakumar held, “The power of the Board to assume the management of an institution is not an unfettered one. Such power can be exercised only in the circumstances specifically contemplated under Sections 98A to 98E of the Act, and only after strict compliance with the statutory safeguards. Section 99 of the Act further contemplates the conduct of an enquiry before any such assumption of management. ”
The Court made the observation while disposing of the petition filed by the Ernakulam Tirumala Devaswom, a denominational temple belonging to the Gowda Saraswath Brahmin Community.
The Court was considering a challenge against communications dated February 28, 2017 and February 21, 2017 issued by the Cochin Devaswom Board in connection with a statutory enquiry and the proposed assumption of management of the Devaswom.
The Court found that the communications appeared to have been issued "without a proper appreciation of the scope and object" of Sections 98 and 99 of the Act.
“The mere use of the expression "assumption of management" in the impugned communications, without reference to the statutory prerequisites, was capable of creating a genuine apprehension in the mind of the petitioner that the Board had already decided to take over the management of the institution,” the Court observed.
The Bench also pointed out that if the object of the Board was only to inquire into the affairs of the Devaswom, the Act itself provides an appropriate mechanism.
"Section 87 of the Act empowers the competent authority to conduct enquiries into the affairs of institutions," the Court noted. It added, “Therefore, if the intention was merely to hold an enquiry, recourse ought to have been taken to the appropriate statutory provision instead of issuing communications suggesting an impending assumption of management.”
Senior Advocates R.D. Shenoy and R. Lakshmi Narayan appeared for the Petitioners and Advocate K.P. Sudheer appeared for the Respondents.
The Cochin Devaswom Board had submitted before the court that it did not intend to invoke Sections 98 and 99 of the Act to assume the management of the petitioner Devaswom. The Court also took note of the Board's earlier public notice clarifying that it had no intention of assuming management of any institution by invoking those provisions.
The Court held, “In view of the categorical statement made before us by the learned Standing Counsel that the Cochin Devaswom Board does not propose to invoke the provisions of Sections 98 and 99 of the Act to assume the management of the petitioner institution, and having regard to the apprehension legitimately entertained by the petitioner on account of the language employed in Exts. P15 and P20, we are of the view that the ends of justice would be served by quashing the said communications. ”
The Court, however, made it clear that if the Cochin Devaswom Board proposes to initiate any proceedings against the Devaswom in future, the same shall be strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Act, after scrupulously adhering to the statutory procedure and the law laid down by the High Court.
The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.
Cause Title: P. Rangadasa Prabhu & Ors. v. The Cochin Devaswom Board & Ors., [2026:KER:61483]
Appearance:
Petitioners: Senior Advocates R.D.Shenoy, R.Lakshmi Narayan, Advocates M.Ashok Kini, R.Ranjanie
Respondents: Advocates K.P. Sudheer, K.R. Sunil, Jency Susan Jose, O.V. Maniprasad, V. Sri Nath, K.R. Vinod
