This issue is relating to the payment of the expenses incurred for erecting 'Edathavalam' in relation to the Sabarimala Pilgrimage for the year 2012-2013. The petitioner submitted that he has erected 'Edathavalam' for the year 2012-2013 and he is entitled to expenses to the tune of Rs.4,30,000/-. On the other hand, the 5th respondent has approached this Court in another writ petition in W.P.(C) No.24264/2013 claiming that the 5th respondent has erected 'Edathavalam' and they are entitled for the reimbursement. This Court in W.P.(C) No.24264/2013 directed the Municipality to transfer the fund of Rs.15,00,000/- received from the Government to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruvalla and also directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to disburse the amount to the eligible person/institution subject to verification of bills/vouchers. The judgment has become final. There are two questions before this Court. First question is that interse dispute between the petitioner and the 5th respondent regarding the claim for reimbursement for erecting 'Edathavalam'. The second question is relating to the point raised by the learned Special Government Pleader stating the Government have not sanctioned any work order for 'Edathavalam' and none of them are eligible for this amount.
2. Before adverting to the interse dispute between the petitioner and the 5th respondent, it is to be noted that the Government have sanctioned Rs.15,00,000/- as per Annexure-1 dated 18.2.2013 towards additional expenditure as special grant to the Thiruvalla Municipality in connection with the Sabarimala Pilgrimage. Therefore, the question is whether this 'Edathavalam' falls within the authorised payment as per the Government Order. There is no dispute about the erection of 'Edathavalam'. Admittedly, the 'Edathavalam' is for the purpose of providing shelter to the Sabarimala pilgrims. This Court in Ext.P7 judgment directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to disburse the amount to the eligible persons after verifying the bills and vouchers etc. Therefore, entitlement cannot be disputed based on the erection of the 'Edathavalam'. The only question left to the decision of the Revenue Divisional Officer is find out the person who has expended the money for 'Edathavalam'.
3. In view of the matter, the objection raised on the side of the Government is untenable. The second question is regarding the interse dispute between the petitioner and the 5th respondent. The petitioner relies on the various materials to substantiate this claim. It is to be noted that in Ext.P7 judgment, this Court did not find that the 5th respondent is not entitled for any amount. On the other hand, it is left to the decision of the Revenue Divisional Officer after verifying bills and vouchers etc.
Therefore, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruvalla shall take a decision in the matter after hearing the petitioner and the 5th respondent within a period of six weeks and based on the decision of the Revenue Divisional Officer, the amount shall be disbursed to the eligible persons. It is submitted by the learned standing counsel for the Municipality that the amount has already been transferred to the account of the Revenue Divisional Officer.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE ln