Temple Land Bought With Public Funds Can't Be Held By Advisory Committee In Its Own Name, Land Must Vest In Deity: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court recently held that temple property purchased using public funds collected from devotees cannot be held in the name of Advisory Committee and must absolutely vest in the deity.The Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar found that the property of the Ernakulam Shiva Temple purchased under the scheme “Ernakulathappanu Oradi Mannu” (One Foot Land for Lord Shiva) was usurped by the Ernakulam Kshetra Kshema Samithi, which had previously acted as the Temple Advisory Committee.The Court highlighted the fact that property was purchased from the funds collected from devotees and therefore, there was no justification in conferring part ownership on a private entity:“The entire purchase consideration had been collected from devotees, rich and poor alike, through donations mobilised by coupons, with the Samithi playing a leading role in the collection of funds…Where land is acquired entirely with funds donated for the deity, there can be no justification whatsoever for conferring co-ownership rights on a private entity….”The usurpation of the property purchased from the Corporation of Kochi came to light while the Court was perusing the records relating to two pleas, one preferred by the Samithi challenging its removal as Advisory Committee. The other was a suo motu petition (DBP No. 41 of 2022) initiated to examine the sharing of income generated from the conduct of trade fairs at the Grounds between the Board and Samithi.The Court remarked that the property was usurped due to the concerted actions of the Samithi, the Cochin Devaswom Board and the Corporation of Kochi:“serious irregularities and instances of usurpation of properties, which were acquired using public funds for the benefit of the temple, have come to the attention of this Court. These irregularities appear to have occurred at the instance of persons who were at the helm of affairs of the Cochin Devaswom Board, the Samithi, and the Kochi Corporation… Since during the consideration of these matters, the above shocking aspect has come to our notice, this Court is obliged to protect religious and charitable properties from encroachment, misuse, or wrongful claims as held by the Apex Court.”The Court also passed various directions for the protection of the property.FactsThe Samithi was acting as a temple advisory committee pursuant to the conferment of such a status upon the organisation by the Board.The decision to mobilise funds through the afore scheme was jointly taken by the Board and the Samithi to purchase the property, located at the eastern portion of the Krishnanvilasam Palace compound, from the Corporation for a concessional rate of around ₹3.75 crores. Thereafter, the Samithi approached the High Court through CMP No. 3062 of 2000 for permission to use the western side of the Palace compound for consolidating funds. Permission was granted to the Samithi to use the area on a temporary basis and it was directed that all amounts realised must be placed before the Court.The Board subsequently gave a licence to the Samithi to conduct trade fair for a period of 11 months for a fee of Rs. 6.5 lakhs and directed that Rs. 5 lakhs from the same was to be adjusted as the Devaswom share of contribution.In 2009, the Board issued an order disclosing that the Samithi had handed over Rs. 3.75 crores to it and thereafter, steps were taken to proceed with the purchase of the property from the Corporation. In 2010, the Court in a suo motu petition (DBP No. 28 of 2010) directed for expediting the proceedings for closure.In 2012, a meeting was convened by the Chief Secretary of the Corporation for resolving the land transfer transaction between the Corporation and the temple. The Chief Secretary had advised that the Corporation has to facilitate the registration of the sale deed in favour of the temple. Perusing the Minutes of the meeting, the Court on 05.12.2012, directed that the sale deed be executed in favour of the temple within a month. This was reiterated in February 2013 as well along with an observation that fresh sanction from the government was not needed for the transfer.This order and similar subsequent orders remained not complied with until April 10, 2013 when the Corporation and Samithi submitted that the sale deed was executed. Thereafter, DBP 28/2010 was disposed of recording the submission but not examining the sale deed.Irregularities It was only while considering the present proceedings did the Court note that the property was purchased partly in the name of the Samithi in clear contravention of the orders passed in DBP 28/2010. It was further noted that the Sale Deed refers to a government order, which had wrongly stated that the afore direction was to transfer the property that the property in the name of the Samithi even though in the meeting it was clearly stated the transfer was to be made in favour of the temple.“Having examined the Sale Deed…, we are shocked to note that the...

Temple Land Bought With Public Funds Can't Be Held By Advisory Committee In Its Own Name, Land Must Vest In Deity: Kerala High Court

K. Salma Jennath

Court also flagged apparent role of Devaswom Board and Kochi Corporation in Ernakulam Shiva Temple irregularities.

Tags