Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 291 (MAD)

Devi Seva Sangam v. Government of Tamil Nadu

2019-01-29

K.K.SASIDHARAN, P.D.AUDIKESAVALU

body2019
ORDER : P.D. AUDIKESAVALU, J. 1. The Petitioner in this Public Interest Litigation seeks a direction to the Respondents to appoint a Committee of Experts in Agama Sastra, Conservation and Traditional Stapathy for the renovation of Arulmigu Bhagavathyamman Temple, Mandaikadu, Kalkulam Taluk, Kanyakumari District and celebrate its consecration by following the Agama Sastra by utilizing the donations collected form the devotees and general public with proper accounts based on his representations dated 28.08.2018, 29.12.2018 and 03.01.2019. 2. We have heard Mr. Ananth C. Rajesh, Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, Mr. A.K. Baskarapandian, Learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the First to Fourth Respondents, Mr. K. Sathya Singh, Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Fifth to Seventh Respondents and perused the materials placed on record, apart from the pleadings of the parties. 3. It is complained by the Petitioner that the existing Kodimaram of the Temple was removed and thrown away and a new wooden block was purchased from a saw-mill and without seasoning and performing the Agama rituals to the same, it was installed in an ordinary way like planting a pole. In the Counter Affidavit dated 29.01.2019 filed by the Sixth Respondent in this regard, it has been stated in paragraphs 4 and 5 as follows:- “4. I humbly submit that the allegations stated by the Petitioner regarding the kodimaram, since the old kodimaram about to fall down, it is decided to install new kodimaram. For that purpose on 15.11.2014 a teak wood about 51 feet length has been purchased by the donors and given to the Temple Authorities on 30.11.2014 and after performing the poojas, works have been started for kodimaram on 19.12.2014 by the advice of the Head Stapathy of the H.R. & C.E. After completing the work, oil treatment was given to the kodimaram on 08.05.2015 for 9 months and thereafter the kodimaram was installed on 06.02.2017 at 9.30 A.M. as per the Order of Commissioner, H.R. & C.E. O. Mu. No. 2963/2017/L2/01.02.2017 in the presence of Joint Commissioner/Executive Officer, Deputy Commissioner/Verification Officer, Superintendent of Padmanabhapuram Devaswom, Srikariyam of the Temple, Technical Supervisor of Devaswom, and the devotees. After installing the kodimaram in the year 2017 and 2018 Masi Kodai festivals were conducted. There was no complaint form anybody. After two years, this Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition raising false allegations and untenable reason for getting unlawful gain. 5. After installing the kodimaram in the year 2017 and 2018 Masi Kodai festivals were conducted. There was no complaint form anybody. After two years, this Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition raising false allegations and untenable reason for getting unlawful gain. 5. As per the order Na. Ka. 2386/2018/G4 dated 23.10.2018 of the Commissioner, H.R. & C.E., Chennai, all the steps have been taken by the Temple Authorities to conduct kalasabishekam (kumbabishekam) to be held on 10.02.2019 in between 9.30 a.m. and 10.30 a.m. At this stage for publicity in the general pubic, the Petitioner has filed the Writ Petition in the name of Devi Seva Sangam with ulterior motive.” We accept the aforesaid explanation made by the Sixth Respondent. 4. On a perusal of the Affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, we find that there has been nothing substantial or reliable to believe that there has been irregularities so as to consider the claim of the Petitioner for appointing an Expert Committee. Insofar as the claim of the Petitioner for collecting donations from the devotees and the general public for conduct of the Kalasabishekam is concerned, we are of the view that such sort of practice for permitting individuals to collect funds from the devotees and general public ought not to be encouraged and it would suffice to clarify that any form of collection of donations for conduct of renovations would have to be made only as per the rules framed by the competent authority in that regard. 5. The Writ Petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.