P.B.Suresh Kumar, J. The Ombudsman for Travancore and Cochin Devaswom Boards received a complaint from one Unnikrishnan Thashnath, an office bearer of an organisation called 'Kalimandalam', stating that they are performing a Kathakali, styled as `Gurudeva Mahatmyam', depicting the life of Sree Narayana Guru and are denied permission to perform the said 'Kathakali' at the premises of Thriprayar Sree Rama Temple due to the intervention of the 'Thantri' of the temple.
2. The learned Ombudsman issued notice to the Cochin Devaswom Board and on receipt of the notice, the Devaswom Board filed a reply admitting that permission was denied to the organisation of the complainant based on the opinion of the 'Thantri'. A copy of the opinion given by the 'Thantri' was also placed before the Ombudsman for consideration.
3. The learned Ombudsman took the view that denying permission to perform the 'Kathakali', depicting the life of Sree Narayana Guru, while permitting the performance of other plays of 'Kathakali', is improper and accordingly, placed the complaint for orders before us.
4. Though notice was issued by this Court to the complainant, there is no appearance for him.
5. We have perused the opinion of the 'Thantri', which was also placed before us with the report of the learned Ombudsman. In the opinion, the 'Thantri' recites that in the temples of Lord 'Sree Rama', by custom and practice, all plays of Kathakali are not permitted to be performed. According to him, plays of Kathakali, depicting the stories of Gods/Goddesses alone are permitted in the temple and even among such plays, the plays such as 'Kharavadam', 'Balivadam' etc. are not permitted. The stand taken by the 'Thantri' is that in view of the usage and customs of the temple, the play, which depicts the life of a social reformer like Sree Narayana Guru cannot be permitted to be performed.
6. The temple is being administered by the Cochin Devaswom Board in accordance with the provisions of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950. Section 68(1) of the said Act mandates that the administration of the temple shall be in accordance with the established usage and customs of the temple. Section 68(1) of the said Act reads thus :
“68. Administration by the Board as a trustee :-
(1) Subject to the provisions of this Act and of any other law for the time being in force, the Board shall be bound to administer the affairs of incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms and institutions under its management in accordance with the objects of the trust, the established usage and customs of the institutions and to apply their funds and property for such purposes.”
The word 'usage' in Section 68(1) of the Act has to be understood as an accepted habitual practice of the temple. The stand of the 'Thantri' that in the temples of Lord 'Sree Rama', by custom and practice, the plays of Kathakali, depicting the stories of Gods/Goddesses alone are permitted and that even among such plays, the plays such as 'Kharavadam', 'Balivadam' etc. are not permitted, is not disputed. The grievance of the complainant concerns the correctness of the usage spoken to by the Thantri. The view expressed by the learned Ombudsman is also as to the correctness of the said usage. It is settled that the performance of a religious practice, according to the tenets, customs and usages prevalent in a temple is an integral part of the religious faith and belief and to that extent, even the legislature cannot intervene to regulate it. In this context, it is worth quoting a passage from the judgment of the Apex Court in A.S. Narayana Deekshitulu v. State of A.P. [(1996) 9 SCC 548], which reads thus:
“There is a distinction between religious service and the person who performs the service; performance of the religious service according to the tenets, Agamas, customs and usages prevalent in the temple etc. is an integral part of the religious faith and belief and to that extent the legislature cannot intervene to regulate it.”
As observed by the Apex Court, if the performance of religious practices, according to the tenets, customs and usages prevalent in a temple are matters which cannot be intervened and regulated by law, the correctness or otherwise of the same cannot be held to be justiciable.
In the light of the principles stated above, we are unable to entertain the complaint and the same is, accordingly, closed.
Sd/-
P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE //true copy// P.A. To Judge smv