P.B. Suresh Kumar, J.
The first petitioner is the Advisory Committee of the Thamanam Ananthapuram Sree Krishna Temple and the second petitioner is its President. They seek directions to the respondents to refrain from dissolving the first petitioner committee. They also seek directions to the respondents to permit them to complete the various works of the temple undertaken by them.
2. It is stated by the petitioners in the writ petition that though they had started the work sanctioned as per Ext.P1 order and completed 70% of the same, they are yet to receive any amount for the work carried out by them. It is also stated that the first respondent, the Cochin Devaswom Board, is taking steps to form a new Advisory Committee for the temple in accordance with Ext.P2 bye- laws.
3. As per interim order dated 10.12.2014, this Court directed the Executive Engineer, Cochin Devaswom Board to visit the temple and to report whether the works referred to in Ext.P4 representation dated 6.10.2014 have commenced or not. In Ext.P4 representation, the W.P.(C) No.26528 of 2014 2 Secretary of the first petitioner Advisory Committee had stated that the Advisory Committee is executing the various works of the temple.
4. Pursuant to the said interim order, a memo dated 18.12.2014 has been filed on behalf of the Cochin Devaswom Board. In the memo filed by the first respondent, a report of the Executive Engineer of Cochin Devaswom Board is produced. The report indicates that though two works were sanctioned by the Cochin Devaswom Board for execution through the Temple Advisory Committee, they have not executed the works sanctioned by the Board.
5. In view of the report of the Executive Engineer of the Cochin Devaswom Board, there is absolutely no basis for the petitioners to seek directions to the respondents to refrain from dissolving the first petitioner committee.
The writ petition, in the circumstances, is devoid of merit and it is, accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE smv Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE