Anil K. Narendran, J.

1. This suo motu proceedings was registered on 06.09.2021, based on a news item that appeared in an online media regarding certain activities undertaken in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, in connection with the wedding of the son of an industrialist, Sri. Ravi Pillai, which was scheduled to be held on 09.09.2021. As per the photographs in that online media report, huge cut-outs, branches of trees, etc., are used for decorating the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple. On 06.09.2021, at 4.00 p.m., the learned Standing Counsel for Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee (hereinafter referred to as 'the Managing Committee'), on instructions, submitted that the cut-outs, branches of trees, etc., used for decorating the Nadappanthal in front of the temple have already been removed. The learned Standing Counsel made available for the perusal of this Court two photographs of the Nadappanthal taken at 3.15 p.m. and sought time to get instructions on the permission, if any, granted in connection with the marriage in question, to decorate the Nadappanthal in front of the temple.

2. On 07.09.2021, when this DBP came up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel for the Managing Committee submitted that the Committee has taken a decision on 12.02.2021 to permit Pushpalankaaram in the Nadappanthal, in connection with the marriage in question. No permission was granted for decorating the Nadappanthal with cut-outs, branches of trees, etc. Everyday 110 marriages are being conducted in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, in strict compliance of Covid-19 protocol. Each marriage party is permitted to have only 12 persons (excluding the bride and the bridegroom). By the order dated 07.09.2021, this Court directed the 1st respondent Administrator of Guruvayur Devaswom to file an affidavit explaining the facts and circumstances in which the Nadappanthal in front of the temple was decorated with huge cut-outs, branches of trees, etc., as seen from the photographs in the online media report. By the said order, the Administrator was directed to take necessary steps to ensure that there is no violation of Covid-19 protocol in the conduct of marriages in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple.

3. On 09.09.2021, after the marriage ceremony, news items with video appeared in online media, as per which the marriage ceremony conducted at the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple was attended by persons far in excess of 12 (excluding the bride and the bridegroom). Instead of Pushpalankaaram the Nadappanthal was decorated mainly with ornamental leaves and decorative hangings, with few flowers.

4. On 14.09.2021, when this DBP came up for consideration, the 1st respondent Administrator filed an affidavit dated 10.09.2021, wherein it is stated that, Sri. Ravi Pillai submitted Ext. R1(a) request before the Managing Committee, on 22.01.2021, to permit him to perform Pushpalankaaram of the temple premises, including Nadappanthal and Kalyanamandapam on 09.09.2021, in connection with the marriage of his son, Sri. Ganesh Pillai, as an offering to Lord Guruvayoorappan. Since similar requests have been allowed in the past several years, the Managing Committee allowed that request, as per Ext. R1(b) Resolution No. 18 dated 12.02.2021. Sri. Ravi Pillai entrusted the work to an event management group and preliminary works commenced on Saturday (04.09.2021) night. On Sunday (05.09.2021) early morning it was noticed that some additional works have been done by the workers in the Nadappanthal. Immediately the work was stopped. Since the additional works were found to be objectionable, the workers were immediately instructed to dismantle the same as only Pushpalankaaram is permitted. The workers and the person-in-charge expressed their regret and removed all additional works. Thereafter, there was strict vigil by the Devaswom staff on all days, till the wedding day, to ensure that there is only Pushpalankaaram. In the affidavit dated 10.09.2021 sworn to by the then Administrator (Smt. T. Breejakumari), it is stated that the initiation of suo motu proceedings and the order of this Court dated 06.09.2021 were informed to Sri. Ravi Pillai. The order of this Court dated 07.09.2021 in this DBP was also intimated to Sri. Ravi Pillai and he was requested to comply with the direction contained in that order, to which he readily obliged. The 1st respondent Administrator intimated the order of this Court dated 07.09.2021 to the Station House Officer, Guruvayur Temple Police Station, vide Ext. R1(c) communication dated 08.09.2021, and sought his assistance to ensure strict compliance of Covid-19 protocol. The stand taken in the affidavit sworn to by the 1st respondent Administrator is that no violation of the orders of this Court or Covid-19 protocol was permitted during the marriage.

5. On 14.09.2021, during the course of arguments, the learned Standing Counsel for the Managing Committee maintained the stand that, as stated in the affidavit dated 10.09.2021 of the 1st respondent Administrator, there was strict vigil on all days after 05.09.2021, by the staff of Guruvayur Devaswom, till the wedding day, in order to ensure that only Pushpalankaaram is done in the Nadappanthal and that, there is no violation of the orders of this Court or Covid-19 protocol during the marriage. In view of the above submission made by the learned Standing Counsel, a news item with video that appeared in an online media [YouTube Link https://youtu.be/MNG3M9_G70Y] was viewed during the court proceedings on 14.09.2021, which was conducted through video conferencing.

6. In the order dated 14.09.2021, this Court noticed that the marriage ceremony conducted in the Nadappanthal was attended by persons far in excess of 12 (excluding the bride and the bridegroom). Instead of Pushpalankaaram the pillars and the ceiling of the Nadappanthal were decorated mainly with ornamental leaves and decorative hangings, with few flowers, as usually done while conducting marriages in auditoriums. On the side of the Nadappanthal, at various places, 'tin-fence' was erected with roofing sheets on temporary steel structures, in order to block the view of the neighbouring property or structure. On 09.09.2021, out of the three Kalyanamandapams in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, one Kalyanamandapam decorated with flowers was set apart exclusively for the marriage of the son of Sri. Ravi Pillai.

7. In the order dated 14.09.2021, this Court noticed that, in view of the provisions under the Guruvayur Devaswom Act, 1978, the conduct of any marriage in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, on the strength of the permission granted by the authorities under the said Act, can only be subject to the custom and usage in that temple and without adversely affecting in any manner the proper performance of worship by other worshippers. Any control or regulation of the movement of worshippers, in the Temple premises, should be by the security staff employed by Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee and also Police personnel deployed on duty, causing the least inconvenience to the worshippers, especially senior citizens, physically challenged persons and minor children. At any rate, a worshipper conducting marriage in the Nadappanthal in front of the temple cannot be permitted to deploy private security personnel to control or regulate the movement of other worshippers in the temple premises. The video of some of the news items that appeared in online media showed the presence of private security personnel in connection with the marriage function in question, wearing black dress and acting like 'bouncers' or private 'bodyguards'.

8. In the order dated 14.09.2021, this Court noticed that, though it was stated in the affidavit dated 10.09.2021 of the 1st respondent Administrator that there was no violation of the orders of this Court or Covid-19 protocol during the marriage, as could be seen from the news items that appeared in online media, the marriage ceremony conducted on 09.09.2021 in the Nadappanthal in front of the temple, was attended by persons far in excess of 12 (excluding the bride and the bridegroom).

9. By the order dated 14.09.2021, this Court impleaded suo motu the State of Kerala, represented by the Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue (Devaswom); the District Police Chief, Thrissur; the District Collector and Chairperson of the District Disaster Management Authority, Thrissur; the Station House Officer, Guruvayur Temple Police Station; the Sectoral Magistrate (for Ward Nos. 1 to 21 of Chavakkad Municipality); the Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee, Rep. by its Administrator; and Sri. Ravi Pillai, as additional respondents 2 to 8 in this DBP. The learned Senior Government Pleader took notice for respondents 2 to 5 and the learned Standing Counsel for Managing Committee took notice for respondents 1 and 7. Urgent notice by speed post was issued to the 8th respondent, returnable within three weeks.

10. By the order dated 14.09.2021, Registry was directed to enclose a copy of this DBP, the order dated 07.09.2021 and also the affidavit dated 10.09.2021 of the 1st respondent Administrator, along with the notice sent to the 8th respondent. Respondents 2 to 5 were directed to file individual affidavits, explaining the facts and circumstances noticed in the order of this Court dated 14.09.2021. The 1st respondent Administrator was directed to file an additional affidavit, explaining the facts and circumstances noticed in the said order, and to furnish a list showing the number of marriages conducted in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, during the period from 17.08.2021 till 17.09.2021, with details of the Kalyanamandapam and the time slots allotted. The 1st respondent Administrator was also directed to ensure that visuals from the CCTVs installed in the Nadappanthal, for the period from 04.09.2021 till 10.09.2021 are kept under safe custody, until further orders. The 8th respondent was directed to place on record an affidavit explaining the facts and circumstances noticed in the order dated 14.09.2021, on or before 01.10.2021. Registry was directed to keep a copy of the news item with video that appeared in online media, referred to in paragraph 13 of the order dated 14.09.2021, copy of which can be furnished to the respondents, if applied for.

11. On 08.10.2021, when this DBP came up for consideration, the affidavits of respondents 1, 4, 5 and 8 were placed on record. The learned Standing Counsel for the Managing Committee submitted that, as stated in paragraph 11 of the additional affidavit filed by the 1st respondent Administrator, CCTV visuals from 04.09.2021 till 10.09.2021 are kept in safe custody.

12. In the additional affidavit filed by the then Administrator (Smt. T. Breejakumari) dated 29.09.2021 it is stated that, on 09.09.2021, 105 marriages were booked online in Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, out of which 11 were cancelled. Accordingly, 94 marriages were conducted on 09.09.2021 in three 'Kalyanamandapams' in the Eastern Nadappanthal. The wedding of the son of the 8th respondent was conducted in the western most Kalyanamandapam, among the three. In the said Kalyanamandapam, the first marriage was conducted at 5.00 a.m. Six marriages were conducted in that Kalyanamandapam, prior to the marriage of the 8th respondent's son. Even after that wedding, several weddings were conducted in that Kalyanamandapam. Due to the restrictions imposed in connection with Covid-19 pandemic, only worshippers who register in the online portal are permitted to have darshan in the date and time of their choice. The point where the Nadappanthal ends and the Melpathur Auditorium begins was barricaded and from that point the devotees, who booked darshan through online portal, are diverted towards the north, after verifying their records and they are permitted to have darshan in accordance with the time slots allotted to them. The marriage parties are diverted towards south from that barricade and 12 members from each marriage party are permitted to enter the Melpathur Auditorium and they are offered seats in that auditorium. As and when their turn comes, each marriage party is permitted to enter into the area where the Kalyanamandapams are arranged, by the Manager or security guards of the Devaswom. The same arrangements were done for the marriage of the son of the 8th respondent also. Only 12 persons were permitted to enter the Melpathur Auditorium area and also to the Kalyanamanadapam area. A correct head count was conducted by security staff, which is evident from the video. No persons more than 12 were permitted into the Kalayanamandapam area for the marriage ceremony of the 8th respondent's son from the Melpathur Auditorium. The Devaswom staff and sufficient police personnel were present near the Kalyanamandapam to ensure that there is no violation of Covid-19 protocol or the directions issued by this Court, in the conduct of the said marriage. No private security personnel were permitted to enter the Kalyanamandapam area or to interfere with the duties of the Devaswom security staff and nowhere they were permitted to control the devotees who came for darshan. The marriage of the 8th respondent's son was conducted subject to the custom and usage in the temple, without adversely affecting in any manner the proper performance of worship by any other worshippers. The persons wearing black dress were not involved in the marriage ceremony conducted in the Kalyanamandapam. The entire Nadappanthal or the Kalyanamandapam was never permitted to be used exclusively by the 8th respondent. The 1st respondent has only acted within the powers conferred as per the statute and none of the statutory provisions has been violated in the conduct of the wedding. The 'tin-fence' seen in the video footage is the protection barricade erected by the contractor, who has been awarded with the contract for construction, which was not erected for the purpose of the wedding of the 8th respondent's son. No discrimination has been meted out to any devotees on account of that wedding. Even on earlier occasions Pushpalankaram of Nadappanthal was done using leaves including ornamental leaves. Some devotees have in the past have fastened Banana plants on the pillars and used tender coconut palm leaves for pushpalankaram, which was done as an offering. No violation of the usage or custom has been permitted in pushpalankaram in the Nadappanthal on the occasion of the wedding of the 8th respondent's son. The temple Gopuram and Naalambalam were decorated mostly with flowers only.

13. Along with a memo dated 01.10.2021 filed by the learned Standing Counsel for the Managing Committee, a list of the marriages conducted in Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple from 17.08.2021 to 17.09.2021 is placed on record, as per which, no marriage was conducted on 07.09.2021.

14. On 15.11.2021, after arguing for some time, the learned Standing Counsel for the Managing Committee sought time to place on record, along with an additional affidavit of the 1st respondent Administrator, the decision taken by the Committee that each marriage party shall have only 12 persons, excluding the bride and the bridegroom, which was in force as on 09.09.2021, and also the decision modifying that restriction, with effect from 08.11.2021.

15. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 15.11.2021, Exts. R1(d) to R1(f) resolutions taken by the Managing Committee regarding the restrictions imposed on account of Covid-19 pandemic were placed on record, along with an additional affidavit sworn to by the present Administrator (Sri. K.P. Vinayan) dated 24.11.2021.

16. On 13.12.2021, this Court noticed that, as evident from Ext. R1(d) resolution No. 1 dated 02.06.2020, a maximum of 10 persons were permitted in a marriage function. That restriction was relaxed by Ext. R1(f) decision No. 4 dated 08.11.2021, whereby it is provided that, in addition to 10 persons permitted in the Mandapam in a marriage function, 10 more persons are permitted to stand outside the Mandapam. In addition to this, four photographers are also permitted. During the course of arguments, the learned Senior Counsel for the 8th respondent submitted that, as can be seen from the video referred to in paragraph 25 of the order dated 14.09.2021, only 12 persons among the marriage party were permitted by the security personnel to enter the area near the Kalyanamandapam.

17. The 3rd respondent District Police Chief has filed an affidavit dated 01.10.2021, wherein it is stated that, in view of the order of this Court dated 07.09.2021, the 1st respondent Administrator issued a letter on 08.09.2021 to the Station House Officer, Guruvayur Temple Police Station, requesting support to ensure compliance of Covid-19 protocol during the marriage ceremony of the 8th respondent's son. In Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, which is a High-Security Zone, special arrangements are made for controlling law and order situation and traffic in and around the temple. Crowd movement and traffic in the inner circle of Guruvayur are under the vigil of police personnel. On receipt of the request from the temple authorities, along with a copy of the order of this Court dated 07.09.2021, the 5th respondent Station House Officer made all the necessary arrangements to see that Covid-19 protocol is adhered to in the temple premises and also to manage crowd in the temple premises in connection with the marriage and also the devotees coming for darshan after online registration. The police personnel extended all assistance to the temple authorities and staff. The entry of the devotees and the marriage parties was regulated by the security personnel deployed by the temple administration. The police personnel deployed in the temple premises ensured that there is no law and order issues or untoward incidents. The marriage of the 8th respondent's son was scheduled at 7.00 am on 09.09.2021. The police personnel were deployed well in advance, in and around the temple, to protect the interest of the devotees and the general public visiting the temple. There was no complaint from any corner regarding any inconvenience at the temple premises. Only the permitted number of persons were allowed to enter the Kalyanamandapam for participating in the ceremony. The police personnel ensured that there was no violation of Covid-19 protocol at the time of the marriage ceremony.

18. In the affidavit dated 01.10.2021 of the 3rd respondent District Police Chief, it is stated that there was no private security personnel deployed at the 'temple nada' for controlling crowd or interfering with the movement of the devotees. Some private security personnel were deployed in front and inside the Poonthanam Auditorium, where the reception in connection with the marriage of the 8th respondent's son was held. Those security personnel were never permitted to interfere with the free movement of the devotees or other marriage parties, who were there at the temple on 09.09.2021. There were about 94 marriages, which took place on the same day, and there was no complaint from any marriage parties regarding any inconvenience. During Sundays and holidays, there will be marriage ceremonies, above 100 in number. During these days, the inflow of devotees will naturally be very high. During auspicious days like Janmashtami, the local crowd used to visit the temple. During those days, the crowd will be more than 10,000 per day. Though the number of persons permitted to occupy the mandapam along with the bride and groom is limited to 12, more persons such as close relatives will accompany the marriage party to the temple and they will gather at the east nadapandal, north side of the queue complex and the south side of the auditorium, with a view to witness the marriage of their kith and kin, from a cautionary distance. When the marriage function is temporarily stopped, when the temple nada is closed in connection with the rituals, the crowd normally will gather at the Nadappanthal waiting for their turn to go to the Kalyanamandapam and devotees to enter the temple for darshan. On 09.09.2021, maximum efforts were taken to see that no difficulty is caused to any devotees visiting the temple for darshan. The police personnel had taken utmost care to ensure that Covid-19 protocol was observed in the temple.

19. The 4th respondent District Collector, who is the Chairperson of the District Disaster Management Authority, has filed an affidavit dated 01.10.2021, wherein it is stated that, though the said respondent has not received any complaint on the matter, clarification was sought for from the 3rd respondent District Police Chief and also the 1st respondent Administrator, on the basis of media reports regarding the alleged violation of Covid-19 protocol during the marriage ceremony of the 8th respondent's son on 09.09.2021. The 6th respondent Sectoral Magistrate has reported that, though the information regarding the marriage ceremony was received in the evening of 08.09.2021, when he reached the temple for inspection, the marriage of the 8th respondent's son was already over.

20. The 6th respondent Sectoral Magistrate has filed an affidavit dated 01.10.2021, taking a stand similar to that taken by the 4th respondent District Collector in the affidavit dated 01.10.2021. In the said affidavit it is stated that, on 09.09.2021, when he visited the temple premises around 8.00 p.m., the marriage of the 8th respondent's son was already over. He gave priority to the zones declared as D Category. Guruvayur Temple was not included in that category.

21. The 5th respondent Station House Officer has filed an affidavit dated 30.09.2021, wherein it is stated that, vide Annexure R5(a) letter dated 08.09.2021 the Chief Finance and Accounts Officer has sought for police assistance to ensure that there is no violation of Covid-19 protocol in the marriages scheduled to be held on 09.09.2021 in Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple. A copy of the order of this Court dated 07.09.2021 was also enclosed along with that letter. Based on that request, the 5th respondent deployed 53 police personnel in uniform for crowd management, as shown in Annexure R5(b). The stand taken by the 5th respondent in the said affidavit is similar to that taken by the 4th respondent District Police Chief in the affidavit dated 01.10.2021. According to the 5th respondent, though there were some guests/devotees in front of the temple for watching the marriage function, only the stipulated number of people were permitted to enter the Kalyanamandapam for the marriage. The people who gathered there for attending their own relative's marriage and the devotees who were in the temple for darshan are seen in the online media news. The photographs of the marriage of the 8th respondent's son are placed on record as Annexure R5(c). In the affidavit, it is stated that there was no deployment of private security guards, either in front of the temple or at the east nadapandal for controlling and regulating the movement of worshippers. The 8th respondent deployed some private security guards in front of and inside the Poonthanam auditorium where the reception function of the marriage was held. The devotees who visited the temple on 09.09.2021 for darshan and those in the marriage party were controlled only by the Devaswom security officers. The 5th respondent has taken utmost care and attention and made all the efforts and arrangements to ensure that Covid-19 protocol was observed on 09.09.2021 at Guruvayur Temple.

22. The 8th respondent has filed an affidavit dated 30.09.2021, which is one sworn to by his power of attorney holder. In the said affidavit, it is stated that the 8th respondent is an ardent devotee of Lord Guruvayurappan and it was his offering (vazhipadu) to the Lord that marriages of his children will be solemnised at Guruvayur. While his daughter's wedding was solemnised at Thirupathi Balaji Temple, he had offered to conduct his son's wedding at Guruvayur Temple. Accordingly, he approached the Devaswom authorities, on 22.01.2021, requesting permission to do Pushpalankaaram in the temple and its premises, as an offering (vazhipadu) to the deity, in connection with his son's wedding on 09.09.2021. Such a request was made as he was aware that in the past too, Devaswom has granted permissions to others to do Pushpalankaaram in and around the temple, as part of marriages solemnised in the Kalyanamandapam in the eastern nada (kizhakke nada). His request was considered by the Managing Committee in the background of the temple custom and practices. A decision was taken by the Managing Committee to grant permission to undertake Pushpalankaaram in and around the temple as vazhipadu in connection with his son's wedding. After getting permission from the Devaswom authorities, the work of floral decorations was entrusted to a contractor with specific instructions to decorate strictly in accordance with the permitted temple custom and practices. The floral decorations by the contractor were only a blend of the flowers and green leaves which are permitted to be used in the temple. The decoration design/pattern adopted by them were more or less similar to the decorations in the temple during 10 days temple festival, as offered by the devotees every year. Only natural leaves were used for decoration. Artificial flowers or leaves were not used at any place, so as to offend the temple practices or custom. The decorations inside the temple were carried out by warrier community designated by the Devaswom, who follow the temple rituals, while the floral decorations at the entrance and in the Nadappanthal were undertaken by the contractor, as per temple custom and practices.

22.1. In the affidavit filed on behalf of the 8th respondent, it is stated that, since time immemorial, flowers have been universally considered to be symbols of peace. The 'mantras' chanted during 'Pushpanjali' literally is a prayer for world peace. Offering flowers and decorating temples with flowers are important parts of Hindu worship. Similarly, certain leaves are also considered to be holy in the ritualistic worship of Hindu Gods and temple decoration. The garlands made of green leaves are hung decorating the main entrance of the temples or areas where rituals are being performed. The significance of hanging leaves is also mentioned in various Puranas and the Bhagavad Gita. More than often, mango leaves are hung in and around temples. Apart from being loaded with antibacterial and antiseptic properties, mango leaves are hung as garlands during large religious gatherings and festivities, because of their unique ability to absorb excess carbon dioxide. Theoretically, the air is purified when it is filtered through the leaves. The 'Dasa Pushpam' or the ten sacred flowers of Kerala are ten herbs traditionally significant to Keralites. But, as a matter of fact, the leaves of most of these plants are used for temple decoration mainly because of their medicinal properties. The garlands and floral decorations are common to the temples of South India including Sabarimala, Chottanikkara and Thirumala Thirupathi, where apart from the flowers, Tulasi, betel leaves, bel leaves, plantain leaves and mango leaves dominate. Therefore, from time immemorial, the use of green leaves forms an integral part of Pushpalankaaram in temples in Kerala as per temple custom, rituals and practices and Guruvayur temple is no exception to this, as is evidenced by the innumerable weddings conducted in the past when the Devaswom has permitted Pushpalankaaram in and around the temple.

22.2. On 09.09.2021, as many as 94 marriages were registered and scheduled to be conducted in Guruvayur Temple. The weddings were conducted in the three Kalyanamandapams on eastern nada. No mandapam was reserved by Devaswom exclusively for the wedding of the 8th respondent's son. Out of the said 94 weddings, several weddings were conducted in the very same Kalyanamandapam where the son of the 8th respondent tied the knot. The muhurthams of the weddings conducted in this Kalyanamandapam commenced as early as 5.00 am, spanning over the entire forenoon. The mandapams were properly sanitized by the Devaswom staff, after each wedding, strictly in accordance with Covid-19 protocol. Therefore, there has not been any special preference extended to the son of the 8th respondent. No Kalyanamandapam was reserved exclusively for his son's wedding and the entire wedding was strictly as per temple custom and practices, after duly following the applicable Covid-19 regulations as on that date. As per the regulations, only 12 persons (excluding the bride and the bridegroom) are allowed to enter the mandapam at the time of the wedding. This number was not exceeded at the wedding of his son on 09.09.2021. The said fact is very clear from Ext. R8(a) photographs. The marriage day, i.e., 09.09.2021, being Thursday and considered to be auspicious to visit and offer prayers to Lord Krishna, many devotees had visited Guruvayur Temple since early morning. Further, the marriage attendees of the remaining 93 weddings scheduled on the same day were also present near the eastern gate.

22.3. Devaswom had deployed their security officers and staff in the usual course to regulate the movement of devotees and the wedding attendees. Police personnel were deployed to regulate the movement of vehicles as well as devotees and the people attending the weddings. Vide the order dated 14.09.2021 in this DBP, this Court observed that, it can be seen from a news item with video which appeared in an online media that the marriage ceremony conducted in the Nadapandhal was attended by persons far in excess of 12 (excluding the bride and the bridegroom). The assumption in the news/online media that the marriage was conducted in the Nadappanthal is incorrect. Nadappanthal is that part which has shops on either sides and is accessible by the public. The marriage was conducted in the mandapam. Only 12 persons (excluding the bride and the bridegroom) had attended the wedding in the Kalyanamandapam. The 8th respondent was surprised to see the video where several persons were seen walking behind his family and proceeding towards the eastern nada. Those are either devotees proceeding towards the eastern nada for darshan or the wedding invitees/family of the remaining 93 weddings solemnised at Guruvayur Temple on the same day. However, it appears that, the video showing a group of persons approaching the 'temple nada' gave an impression to this Court that the entire crowd seen in the video was invitees to the wedding of his son. The video which appeared online does not reflect the true state of affairs. The actual photographs taken at the time of wedding reflect the persons inside the Kalyanamandapam as not exceeding 12 in number. Also a few other persons can be seen viewing the wedding ceremony standing at a distance from the Kalyanamandapam on the other side of the barricade. Those are devotees who had registered online for darshan and are not persons who had come to attend the wedding of 8th respondent's son.

22.4. Covid-19 protocol was strictly followed by each of his family members, who attended the wedding at Guruvayur Temple. This Court in the order dated 14.09.2021 recorded that the video which appeared online shows the presence of certain private security personnel wearing black dress and that such personnel cannot be deployed to control or regulate the movement of worshippers in the temple premises. No service of private security personnel was engaged by the 8th respondent or the Devaswom in or around the Kalyanamandapam or the Nadappanthal. Only Devaswom employees and guards were seen at the temple premises throughout the wedding ceremony, so as to regulate the movement of the worshippers. The 8th respondent has not made any request for deploying any security guards in the Nadappanthal or the temple premises. The wedding of the 8th respondent's son at Guruvayur kizhakkenada has not caused any inconvenience to any of the devotees or any of the invitees/family of the other 93 weddings solemnised in the temple on 09.09.2021. There has also not been any blockage of entry or access to any of the devotees. No such complaint has been brought to the notice of the 8th respondent by the Devaswom, and to the best of his knowledge, there is none. As a responsible citizen and a staunch devotee of Lord Guruvayurappan, the 8th respondent had taken all precautions to ensure that the wedding is being conducted strictly in accordance with the temple custom, practices and rituals, without any inconvenience to even a single devotee or the public at large.

22.5. This Court has in the order dated 14.09.2021 recorded that the video which appeared online shows that on the side of Nadappanthal, at various places, tin-fence is erected with roofing sheets on temporary steel structures, in order to block the view of the neighbouring property or structure. The erection of such tin-fence came to the knowledge of the 8th respondent only after he had returned to Bahrain, and upon a perusal of the order dated 14.09.2021 of this Court. He immediately made enquiries and came to know that tin roofing sheets were put on the side by the Devaswom, weeks before the wedding, as a safety measure in view of the demolition works being carried out in the neighbouring property. The erection of these roofing sheets is totally unrelated to the wedding of 8th respondent's son conducted in Guruvayur Temple on 09.09.2021. Further, enquiries have revealed that these sheets are still in place, in view of the construction works being carried on by the Devaswom, as evident from Ext. R8(b) photographs taken on 26.09.2021. It appears that certain reports had appeared online on the website www.mediamalayamnews.com on 05.09.2021, along with certain photographs regarding certain activities undertaken in the nadapandhal including the use of cut-outs and branches of trees for its decorations. It is on the basis of the said news item that this Court had initiated suo moto proceedings. However, at the time of the wedding, there has not been any installations contrary to the accepted temple custom and practices. When the 8th respondent reached Guruvayur on the 07.09.2021, there were no cut-outs or tree branches in the nadapandhal or the temple premises. As a true devotee of Lord Guruvayurappan, the 8th respondent has always considered as a duty to extend all possible help to the downtrodden, the disabled, the underprivileged and the weaker sections of society. Ext. R8(c) is a compilation of articles on the philanthropic activities of the 8th respondent.

23. Along with a memo dated 10.03.2022, the learned counsel for the 8th respondent has placed on record a copy of the relevant pages of the book captioned "Temples of Kerala" authored by Sri. S. Jayashanker and published by Directorate of Census Publications, Kerala and also a copy of the relevant pages of the judgment of this Court in O.P. No. 2071 of 1993 dated 10.01.1994.

24. On 11.07.2022, the 8th respondent filed I.A. No. 1 of 2022, producing herewith Exts. R8(e) to (g) as additional documents. The document marked as Ext. R8(g) is two photographs of floral decorations in Thirumala Thirupathi Temple using Anthurium and another photograph regarding Pushpalankaaram in Sabarimala Sannidhanam.

25. On 08.08.2022, when this DBP was taken up for consideration, along with a memo filed by the learned Standing Counsel for the Managing Committee, the published list of Vazhipadu in Guruvayur Temple is placed on record, which does not include Pushpalankaaram.

26. On 19.12.2022, a third party has filed I.A. No. 2 of 2022, invoking the provisions under Order I, Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking an order to get himself impleaded as additional 9th respondent in this DBP. On 04.01.2023, when that interlocutory application came up for consideration, the learned counsel for the 8th respondent sought time to file a counter affidavit.

27. The 8th respondent has filed a counter affidavit dated 17.01.2023, opposing the relief sought for in that interlocutory application. On 20.01.2023, the applicant in I.A. No. 2 of 2022 sought time to file a reply affidavit. Though the applicant has filed a reply affidavit dated 22.01.2023, which was presented on 23.01.2023, Registry noted certain defects and therefore, the reply affidavit is incorporated in the judges' papers with filing defect, since the applicant made handwritten corrections in the reply affidavit.

28. On 07.02.2023, detailed arguments were heard in I.A. No. 2 of 2022. Thereafter, this Court dismissed the said interlocutory application by the order dated 28.02.2023. Paragraphs 12, 13 and also the last paragraph of that order read thus;

"12. The grievance of the applicant, which is highlighted in the affidavit filed in support of this interlocutory application for impleadment, has absolutely no bearing on the issues pending consideration in DBP No. 17 of 2021, which is registered suo motu based on a news item that appeared in an online media regarding certain activities undertaken in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple in connection with the wedding of the son of the additional 8th respondent.

13. In such circumstances, the applicant is not a 'necessary party' or a 'proper party' in DBP No. 17 of 2021. The applicant is also not a person who is directly affected by the outcome of this DBP. In the result, this interlocutory application fails and the same is accordingly, dismissed. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the rival contentions in the affidavits placed on record, in respect of proceedings pending before the Magistrate Court, regarding the disputes between the applicant and the additional 8th respondent. On account of the pendency of such proceedings, we refrain from expressing anything on the merits of the contention raised by the additional 8th respondent that the applicant has filed this interlocutory application with malicious and vexatious intentions."

29. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Managing Committee for respondents 1 and 7, the learned Senior Government Pleader for respondents 2 to 6 and the learned Senior Counsel/the learned counsel for the 8th respondent.

30. The learned Standing Counsel for Managing Committee would contend that in connection with the marriage of the son of the 8th respondent held on 09.09.2021, there was no violation of Covid-19 protocol. As permitted by the Managing Committee vide its decision dated 12.02.2021 the 8th respondent was permitted to have pushpalankaram at the Nadappanthal. As stated in the affidavit filed by the 1st respondent Administrator, initially, certain objectionable works were undertaken in the Nadappanthal on 04.09.2021. When it was noticed, the 8th respondent was instructed to remove such materials. Thereafter, pushpalankaram of Nadappanthal alone was conducted and as such there is no violation of the decision taken by the Managing Committee whereby he was permitted to have pushpalankaram in Nadappanthal.

31. The learned Senior Government Pleader for respondents 2 to 6 would contend that crowd management inside the temple premises is normally done by the security personnel deputed by the Managing Committee. As stated in the affidavits filed by the official respondents, earnest efforts were made to ensure that there is no Covid-19 protocol violation in connection with the marriages conducted on 09.09.2021 in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Temple.

32. The learned Senior Counsel/the learned counsel for the 8th respondent would contend that there was absolutely no violation of any Covid-19 protocol in connection with the marriage ceremony conducted on 09.09.2021. As per the restrictions prevailing on account of Covid-19 protocol, only 12 persons excluding the bride and the bridegroom were permitted entry into Kalyanamandapam. Pushpalankaram of the Nadappanthal was done strictly in terms of the permission granted by the Managing Committee in Ext. R1(b) decision taken on 12.02.2021. The 8th respondent entrusted the work to an event management team which had erected certain cut-outs in the Nadappanthal. When this was objected to, the workers immediately removed the same. Thereafter, only pushpalankaram was done in the Nadappanthal, which is not in any manner contrary to the custom, rituals and practices being followed in Guruvayur Temple. Nadappanthal do not form part of the temple. On either side of the Nadappanthal, there are shops and other commercial establishments. The worshippers moving through the Nadappanthal are permitted to wear footwear. There are even comfort stations on the side of Nadappanthal. Therefore, the decorations made in the Nadappanthal, in connection with the marriage of the 8th respondent's son will not in any manner amounts to a violation of the custom, rituals and practices followed in Guruvayur Temple. Such permissions were granted on prior occasions as well. It was in such circumstances, the 8th respondent was permitted to have pushpalankaram based on Ext. R1(b) decision taken on 12.02.2021 by the Managing Committee.

33. The Guruvayur Devaswom Act, 1978, enacted by the State Legislature, which received the assent of the President on 18.03.1978, makes provision for the proper administration of the Guruvayur Devaswom. Section 3 of the Act deals with incorporation. As per sub-section (1) of Section 3, the administration, control and management of the Devaswom shall be vested in a Committee constituted in the manner hereinafter provided. As per sub-section (2) of Section 3, the Committee shall by the name of 'the Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee' be a body corporate and shall have perpetual succession and a common seal and shall by the said name sue and be sued through the Administrator.

34. Section 4 of the Act deals with composition of Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee. As per sub-section (1) of Section 4, the Committee shall consist of the members enumerated in clauses (a) to (e). As per sub-section (2) of Section 4, a person shall be disqualified for being nominated under clause (e) of sub-section (1), if he falls under clauses (i) to (v). As per sub-section (4) of Section 4, every member of the Committee shall, before entering upon his office make and subscribe in the presence of the Commissioner an oath in the following form, that is to say-

"I, AB, do swear in the name of God that I profess the Hindu Religion and believe in temple worship and that I do not believe in the practice of untouchability."
Section 9 of the Act deals with remuneration of the Chairman and members. As per Section 9, no member of the Committee shall receive or be paid any salary or other remuneration except such travelling or daily allowances, if any, as may be prescribed.

35. Section 10 of the Act deals with the duties of the Committee. As per clause (a) of Section 10, subject to the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder, it shall be the duty of the Committee, subject to the custom and usage in the temple, to arrange for the proper performance of the rites and ceremonies in the temple and the subordinate temples attached thereto in accordance with the dittam or scale of expenditure fixed for the temple and the subordinate temples under Section 20 or, till the dittam or scale of expenditure is fixed under that Section, in accordance with the dittam or scale of expenditure fixed for the temple and the subordinate temples under Section 51 of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951; and as per clause (b) of Section 10, to provide facilities for the proper performance of worship by the worshippers.

36. Section 14 of the Act deals with appointment of Administrator. As per sub-section (1) of Section 14, the Committee shall appoint an officer of Government not below the rank of Deputy Collector to be the Administrator for the Devaswom, from among a panel of names furnished by the Government. As per sub-section (2) of Section 14, no person shall be appointed under sub-section (1), unless he professes the Hindu Religion and believes in temple worship. Section 17 of the Act deals with powers and duties of Administrator. As per sub-section (1) of Section 17, the Administrator shall be the Secretary to the Committee and its Chief Executive Officer and shall, subject to the control of the Committee, have powers to carry out its decisions in accordance with the provisions of this Act. As per sub-section (2) of Section 17, the Administrator shall arrange for the proper collection of offering made in the temple. As per sub-section (3) of Section 17, the Administrator shall have power to incur expenditure not exceeding five thousand rupees to meet unforeseen contingencies during the interval between two meetings of the Committee.

37. Section 35 of the Act provides that, Thantri to be final authority in religious matters. As per sub-section (1) of Section 35, nothing in this Act shall be deemed to authorise the Committee or the Commissioner or the Government to interfere with the religious or spiritual matters pertaining to the Devaswom. As per sub-section (2) of Section 35, the decision of the Thantri of the temple on all religious, spiritual, ritual or ceremonial matters pertaining to the Devaswom shall be final, unless such decision violates any provision contained in any law for the time being in force.

38. A reading of the provisions of the Act makes it explicitly clear that the role assigned to Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee constituted under Section 3 of the Guruvayur Devaswom Act, 1978, is that of a trustee in management of the properties vested in the deity. The Managing Committee is duty bound to scrupulously follow the stipulations contained in the Act of 1978. Unless a contrary intention, either expressly or by necessary implication, arises from the provisions of the statute in any particular subject or context, Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee is legally bound to administer and manage the Devaswom and its properties in accordance with the settled legal principles relating to the administration of Hindu Religious Trusts. The Committee, being the trustee in management of Devaswom properties, is legally bound to perform its duties with utmost care and caution.

39. All the properties, including movable and immovable properties and money, dedicated to or endowed in the name of Lord Guruvayurappan or any property acquired in any manner by Guruvayur Devaswom shall vest in the idol of Lord Guruvayurappan, consecrated in Sree Krishna Temple, Guruvayur. The Managing Committee is legally bound to administer, control and manage all the properties belonging to Guruvayur Devaswom in accordance with the provisions of the said Act. The Administrator and the Commissioner shall also function within the framework of the statute. The Managing Committee, which functions as a trustee, is bound to administer, control and manage the properties belonging to Guruvayur Devaswom in accordance with public interest and in the interest of the worshippers. In view of the prohibition contained in sub-section (1) of Section 35 of the Act, neither the Managing Committee nor the Commissioner or the Government shall interfere with the religious or spiritual matters pertaining to Guruvayur Devaswom. In view of the provisions under Rule 6 of the Guruvayur Devaswom Rules, 1980, the Managing Committee shall not alter or cause to alter the performance of customary rites and ceremonies in Guruvayur Temple.

40. Rule 3 of the Guruvayur Devaswom Rules, 1980 deals with power of the Committee over the actions of the Administrator. As per Rule 3, the Committee may call for and examine any record connected with any action of the Administrator and give such directions to him in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules and Regulations made thereunder, as the Committee may consider necessary. As per Rule 4, the Administrator shall take steps to implement all the lawful decisions of the Committee. Rule 6 provides that Committee not to alter the performance of rites and ceremonies, etc. As per Rule 6, the Committee shall not alter or cause to alter the performance of customary rites and ceremonies in the temple.

41. In Suo Motu v. Managing Committee and others [2022 (6) KLT 849], DBP No. 21 of 2021 was registered suo motu based on the letter dated 19.04.2021 of the Administrator, Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee, addressed to the Registrar General of this Court, which pertains to the entry of a former Administrator of Guruvayur Devaswom, along with two members of the Managing Committee (additional respondents 5 and 6 therein), into the Nalambalam of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, on 14.04.2021 at 2.30 a.m., in violation of Decision No. 2 taken by the Managing Committee on 12.04.2021, imposing absolute restriction on entry of devotees. Regarding the incident that occurred on 14.04.2021, the Administrator submitted a complaint dated 16.04.2021 to the Station House Officer, Guruvayur Temple Police Station, along with a submission dated 16.04.2021 of the Deputy Administrator. Thereafter, in view of the direction contained in the order of the Devaswom Bench dated 07.12.2020 in D.B.P. No. 52 of 2020, the Administrator reported to this Court the action taken on the entry of the former Administrator and two others into the Nalambalam, vide letter dated 19.04.2021 addressed to the Registrar General of this Court. By the order dated 07.12.2021 in DBP No. 21 of 2021, the Administrator was directed to place on record, along with an affidavit, the norms prescribed by the Managing Committee for entry into the Nalambalam for Vishukani darshan and Nirmalya darshan, which was in force before the restrictions imposed in connection with Covid-19 pandemic, and also the norms currently in force. The Administrator was also directed to bring to the notice of this Court the action, if any, taken on the entry of vehicle near the temple entrance in September, 2021, allegedly in the presence of three members of the Managing Committee, in connection with which three security personnel were placed under suspension.

42. In Suo Motu [2022 (6) KLT 849] - order dated 21.06.2022 in DBP No. 21 of 2021 - this Court noticed that, in view of the provisions under Section 17 of the Act and Rule 3 of the Rules, any direction issued by the Managing Committee to the Administrator shall be lawful. The Managing Committee committed a grave irregularity in not taking any action on the entry of respondents 5 to 7 therein and also the then Administrator of Guruvayur Devaswom, into the Nalambalam on 14.04.2021, in violation of Decision No. 2 dated 12.04.2021. The Managing Committee even interfered with the action taken by the then Administrator, who was bound to take action on such violations, in view of the directions contained in the order of this Court dated 07.12.2020 in D.B.P. No. 52 of 2020. The decision taken by the Managing Committee to withdraw the complaint made by the Administrator and the consequential closure of that complaint by the 4th respondent Station House Officer was never brought to the notice of this Court, despite the fact that the Administrator had already reported that incident to Registrar General of this Court. In the order dated 21.06.2022 in DBP No. 21 of 2021, this Court strongly deprecated the above conduct of the Managing Committee, which amounted to its failure to discharge the statutory duties.

43. In Suo Motu [2022 (6) KLT 849] this Court held that, a 'worshipper', who shows reverence and adoration for Lord Guruvayurappan, is duty bound to exercise his right to worship in an accustomed manner and subject to the practice and tradition in Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple. Nadappanthal is not intended for the movement of worshippers in vehicles. Entry of vehicles through Nadappanthal will certainly cause inconvenience to the worshippers, especially children of tender age, senior citizens, persons with disabilities and also mentally challenged persons. Restricted entry of vehicles through the northern gate, causing least inconvenience to the worshippers moving through the Nadappanthal, can be permitted for disabled persons or aged persons with restricted movement. Similarly, restricted movement of vehicles for the supply of articles to the temple for offerings and annadhanam, causing least inconvenience to the worshippers moving through the Nadappanthal, can also be permitted. In addition to this, the movement of ambulance through the Nadappanthal, in case of emergency, can also be permitted. However, the practice of permitting a class of worshippers to bring their vehicles upto Bhagavathy Temple, through the Nadappanthal, with the active support of the members of the Managing Committee or the Administrator, has to be stopped with immediate effect. Paragraphs 47 and 48 of that order read thus;

"47. As already noticed hereinbefore, a 'worshipper', who shows reverence and adoration for Lord Guruvayurappan, is duty bound to exercise his right to worship in an accustomed manner and subject to the practise and tradition in Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple. Nadappanthal is not intended for the movement of worshippers in vehicles. Entry of vehicles through Nadappanthal will certainly cause inconvenience to the worshippers, especially children of tender age, senior citizens, persons with disabilities and also mentally challenged persons. Restricted entry of vehicles through the northern gate, causing least inconvenience to the worshippers moving through the Nadappanthal, can be permitted for disabled persons or aged persons with restricted movement. Similarly, restricted movement of vehicles for the supply of articles to the temple for offerings and annadhanam, causing least inconvenience to the worshippers moving through the Nadappanthal, can also be permitted. In addition to this, the movement of ambulance through Nadappanthal, in case of emergency, can also be permitted. However, the practise of permitting a class of worshippers to bring their vehicles upto Bhagavathy Temple, through the Nadappanthal, with the active support of the members of the Managing Committee or the Administrator, has to be stopped with immediate effect.

48. Regarding entry of senior citizens, it is stated in the affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent that, prior to Covid-19 pandemic, there was a separate queue for senior citizens. On account of the restrictions imposed in connection with Covid-19 pandemic, no separate queue is provided for senior citizens. But that issue is under consideration of the Managing Committee. In case a decision on the issue relating to a separate queue for senior citizens is yet to be taken, the 1st respondent Managing Committee shall consider that issue and take an appropriate decision, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The 1st respondent Managing Committee shall also consider the issue of providing appropriate arrangement for the darshan of persons with disabilities and also mentally challenged persons, within the aforesaid time limit."

44. One of the issues that arises for consideration in this DBP is as to whether there was violation of Covid-19 protocol in the conduct of the marriage of the 8th respondent's son, on 09.09.2021 in the Kalyanamandapam in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple.

45. The stand taken in the individual affidavits filed by the 1st respondent Administrator, the 3rd respondent District Police Chief, the 5th respondent Station House Officer and also the stand taken in affidavit filed on behalf of the 8th respondent is that there was no violation of the order of this Court dated 07.09.2021 in this DBP or Covid-19 protocol during the marriage of the 8th respondent's son, which was held on 09.09.2021 in the Kalyanamandapam in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple. In the individual affidavits they would contend that only 12 members of the marriage party (excluding the bride and the bridegroom), were permitted to enter the Melpathur Auditorium area and also the Kalyanamandapam area and as such, there was no violation of Covid-19 protocol.

46. In the order dated 07.09.2021, this Court noticed the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel for the Managing Committee that every day 110 marriages are being conducted at the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, in strict compliance of Covid-19 protocol. Each marriage party is permitted to have only 12 persons, excluding the bride and the bridegroom. After recording the aforesaid submission, this Court by the order dated 07.09.2021 directed the 1st respondent Administrator to take necessary steps to ensure that there is no violation of Covid-19 protocol in the conduct of marriages in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple.

47. On 13.09.2021, the 1st respondent Administrator has filed an affidavit dated 10.09.2021, wherein it is stated that the order of this Court dated 07.09.2021 was intimated to the 8th respondent, who was requested to comply with the directions contained in that order, to which he readily obliged. In that affidavit the 1st respondent Administrator has stated that no violation of the orders of this Court or Covid-19 protocol was permitted during the marriage. On 14.09.2021, during the course of arguments, the learned Standing Counsel for the Managing Committee maintained the stand that, as stated in the affidavit dated 10.09.2021, there was strict vigil by the staff of Guruvayur Devaswom, on all days after 05.09.2021, till the wedding day, in order to ensure that only pushpalankaaram is done in the Nadappanthal and that there is no violation of the orders of this Court or Covid-19 protocol during the marriage. In view of the above submission made by the learned Standing Counsel, a news item with video that appeared in an online media was viewed during court proceedings on 14.09.2021 and thereafter, this Court passed a detailed order, whereby the 1st respondent Administrator was directed to file an additional affidavit, explaining the facts and circumstances noticed in that order.

48. The stand taken in the additional affidavit filed by the 1st respondent Administrator is that the devotees, who booked darshan through online portal and the marriage parties are diverted at the point where the Nadappanthal ends and the Melpathur Auditorium begins, by providing barricades. The marriage parties are diverted towards south from that barricade and 12 members from each marriage party are permitted to enter Melpathur Auditorium. As and when their turn comes, each marriage party is permitted to enter the area where the Kalyanamandapams are arranged, by the Manager or security guards of the Devaswom. The same arrangements were done in the marriage of the 8th respondent's son and only 12 persons were permitted to enter the Melpathur Auditorium area and also the Kalyanamandapam area.

49. The stand taken in the affidavit dated 01.10.2021 filed by the 3rd respondent District Police Chief is that, though the number of persons permitted to occupy the Mandapam along with the bride and the bridegroom is limited to 12, more persons such as close relatives will accompany the marriage party to the temple and they will gather at the east Nadappanthal, north side of the queue complex and the south side of the auditorium to witness the marriage function. The stand taken in the affidavit dated 13.09.2021 of the 5th respondent Station House Officer is that, though there were some guests/devotees in front of the temple for watching the marriage function, only the stipulated number of people were permitted to enter the Mandapam, for the marriage.

50. The stand taken by the 8th respondent in the affidavit dated 13.09.2021 is also the effect that only 12 persons (excluding the bride and the bridegroom), attended the wedding in the Kalyanamandapam. In the video several persons were seen walking behind the 8th respondent and his family and proceeding towards the eastern Nada. Those are either devotees proceeding towards the eastern nada for Darshan or the wedding invitees/family of the remaining 93 weddings solemnised at Gurvayur Sree Krishna Temple on 09.09.2021.

51. A reading of the affidavit filed on behalf of the 8th respondent would show that the said respondent has no case that the marriage party consisted only 12 persons (excluding the bride and the bridegroom). The stand of the said respondent is that only 12 persons (excluding the bride and the bridegroom) were allowed to enter the Kalyanamandapam for attending the wedding. In the order dated 13.12.2021, this Court noticed the submission made by the learned Senior Counsel for the 8th respondent that only 12 persons among the marriage party were permitted by the security personnel to enter the area near the Kalyanamandapam, which can be seen from the video referred to in paragraph 25 of the order of this Court dated 14.09.2021.

52. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 15.11.2021, copy of the resolutions taken by the Managing Committee regarding the restrictions imposed on account of Covid-19 pandemic are placed on record as Exhibits R1(d) to R1(f), along with an additional affidavit dated 24.11.2021 filed by the 1st respondent Administrator. Ext. R1(d) resolution No. 1 dated 02.06.2020 is extracted hereunder;

"This content is in vernacular language. Kindly email us at info@legitquest.com for this content."

As per Ext. R1(d) resolution dated 02.06.2020 of the Managing Committee, a maximum of 10 persons are permitted in a marriage function. For photography, the service of a photographer shall be provided by the Devaswom.

53. Ext. R1(e) resolution No. 5 dated 30.08.2020 of the Managing Committee is extracted hereunder;

"This content is in vernacular language. Kindly email us at info@legitquest.com for this content."

As per Ext. R1(e) resolution dated 30.08.2020 of the Managing Committee, in addition to a maximum of 60 marriages per day, the Committee decided to permit entry of 1,000 devotees per day for darshan, after complying with Covid-19 protocol, within the time slots mentioned in the said resolution, based on online booking.

54. Ext. R1(f) resolution No. 4 dated 08.11.2021 of the Managing Committee is extracted hereunder;

"This content is in vernacular language. Kindly email us at info@legitquest.com for this content."

A reading of Ext. R1(f) resolution dated 08.11.2021 would show that the condition stipulated in Ext. R1(d) resolution dated 02.06.2020 permitting a maximum of 10 persons in a marriage function was relaxed vide the resolution dated 08.11.2021, by permitting 10 more persons in a marriage party. By the said resolution, 4 photographers are also permitted in a marriage function. Ext. R1(f) resolution dated 08.11.2021, which was one taken by the Managing Committee after the orders of this Court dated 07.09.2021 and 14.09.2021, is worded in such a manner to give an impression that the permission originally granted in Ext. R1(d) resolution dated 02.06.2020 was for entry of 10 persons into the Mandapam. Therefore, it is stated in Ext. R1(f) resolution dated 08.11.2021 that, in addition to 10 persons permitted in the Mandapam for a marriage function conducted in the premises of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, 10 more persons are permitted to stand outside the Mandapam.

55. A few screenshots taken from the video that appeared in online media regarding the marriage of the 8th respondent's son, conducted in the Kalyanamandapam in the Nadapanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, referred to in paragraph 13 of the order dated 14.09.2021, are reproduced hereunder;

56. The screenshots reproduced hereinbefore would show that, openly flouting the restrictions imposed in Ext. R1(d) resolution dated 02.06.2020 of the Managing Committee regarding the maximum number of persons in a marriage function conducted in the premises of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, the marriage party in connection with the marriage of the 8th respondent's son consisted of persons far in excess of that maximum limit. The 8th respondent was granted permission to have photographers and Nadaswaram, while proceeding through Nadappanthal towards Kalyanamandapam. Till the issuance of Ext. R1(f) resolution dated 08.11.2021, in view of the condition stipulated in Ext. R1(d) resolution dated 02.06.2020, the devotees have to avail the service of the photographers provided by the Devaswom, for taking photographs of a marriage function in the Kalyanamandapam.

57. It is pertinent to note at this juncture, the observations made by this Court in the order dated 21.06.2022 in DBP No. 21 of 2021 - Suo Motu [2022 (6) KLT 849] - which was registered suo motu in connection with the entry of a former Administrator of Guruvayur Devaswom along with two members of the Managing Committee, into the Nalambalam of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, in violation of the decision taken by the Managing Committee on 12.04.2021, imposing absolute restriction on the entry of devotees. In the said DBP, this Court passed an order dated 07.12.2021, whereby the 1st respondent Administrator was directed to bring to the notice of this Court the action, if any, taken on the entry of vehicles near the temple entrance in September, 2021, allegedly in the presence of three members of the Managing Committee. By the order dated 21.06.2022 this Court directed that the practice of permitting a class of worshippers to bring their vehicles upto Bhagavathy Temple, through the Nadappanthal, with the active support of the members of the Managing Committee or the Administrator has to be stopped with immediate effect. The incident referred to in paragraphs 43 to 46 of that order is regarding entry of a vehicle carrying Sri. Ravi Pillai, the 8th respondent herein, and cine actor Mohanlal, on 09.09.2021 at 2.45 a.m. They were received near Bhagavathy Temple by Sri. K.V. Shaji, a member of the then Managing Committee, who was arrayed as the 5th respondent in DBP No. 21 of 2021. Paragraphs 43 to 46 of the said order read thus;

"43. By the order dated 07.12.2021, the 2nd respondent Administrator was directed to bring to the notice of this Court, the action, if any, taken on the entry of vehicle near the temple entrance in September, 2021, allegedly in the presence of three members of the Managing Committee, in connection with which three security personnel were placed under suspension. In the affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent Administrator it is stated that the Security Superintendent has made a written submission that, on 09.09.2021, at 2.00 a.m., the vehicle of actor Mohanlal was permitted to enter the northern gate, accompanied by Mallissery Paramesan Namboothiripad, the Karanavan of the Mallissery Illom, who is a member of the Managing Committee, in another vehicle, and a controversy arose in social media regarding that incident. Vehicle entry is prohibited through eastern and western gates to the temple premises. However, restricted vehicle entry is permitted through southern and northern gates. Vehicles for supply of articles to the temple for offerings and annadanam, vehicles of disabled and aged persons and also ambulances are permitted entry through southern and northern gates, on request. The vehicles of persons who proceed to Thantrimadom, vehicles to the official residence of the Administrator, vehicles for the supply of articles to the hotels on the northern side, etc., are permitted entry by the security staff, through the northern gate, upon verification of the genuineness of the purpose of entry.

44. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 07.12.2021, the learned Standing Counsel for Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee has made available for the perusal of this Court the files relating to the norms prescribed by the Managing Committee for entry into the Nalambalam for Vishukani darshan, Nirmalya darshan, etc. The said files contain the files relating to the incident that occurred on 09.09.2021. Regarding the said incident, a submission dated 11.09.2021 made by the Security Guard to the Security Supervisor, Guruvayur Devaswom is available at page No. 153 of File No. 005942/21, which is extracted hereunder;

"This content is in vernacular language. Kindly email us at info@legitquest.com for this content."

45. The submission dated 11.09.2021 made by the Security Supervisor to the Administrator, based on the aforesaid submission of the Security Guard and also the submission of another security staff, is available at page No. 151 of File No. 005942/21, which reads thus;

"This content is in vernacular language. Kindly email us at info@legitquest.com for this content."

46. The statements made in paragraphs 7 and 8 of the affidavit dated 16.12.2021 filed by the 2nd respondent Administrator and also the materials on record in the relevant files would make it explicitly clear that a class of worshippers are permitted to bring their vehicles upto Bhagavathy Temple, through the Nadappanthal, with the active support of the Members of the Managing Committee or the Administrator. In the written submission extracted hereinbefore at paragraph 44, the presence of the additional 5th respondent (K.V. Shaji) is mentioned. A reading of the said submission would show that the vehicles, which entered through the northern gate, proceeded directly to Bhagavathy Temple, through the Nadappanthal."

(underline supplied)

58. The incident referred to in the order dated 21.06.2022 in DBP No. 21 of 2021 would make it explicitly clear that the 8th respondent was permitted to conduct the marriage of his son on 09.09.2021 in the Kalyanamandapam in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Temple, openly flouting the restrictions imposed in connection with Covid-19 pandemic, with the active connivance of the members of the then Managing Committee. We deprecate in the strongest words the conduct of the 1st respondent Administrator and also the 8th respondent in filing affidavits before this Court with twisted facts, with reference to the restrictions imposed by the Managing Committee in the conduct of marriages in the premises of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple in connection with Covid-19 pandemic.

59. In the order dated 14.09.2021, this Court noticed that, the video of some of the news items that appeared in online media showed the presence of private security personnel in connection with the marriage function of the 8th respondent's son, wearing black dress and acting like 'bouncers' or private 'bodyguards'. The stand taken in the additional affidavit dated 29.09.2021 filed by the 1st respondent Administrator is that, no private security personnel were permitted to enter the Kalyanamandapam area or to interfere with the duties of the Devaswom security staff. Nowhere private security personnel were permitted to control the devotees came for darshan. Persons wearing black dress were not involved in the marriage ceremony conducted in the Kalyanamandapam. In the affidavit dated 01.10.2021 filed by the 3rd respondent District Police Chief, it is stated that no private security personnel were deployed at the temple nada for controlling crowd or interfering with the movement of the devotees. Some private security personnel were deployed in front of and inside Poonthanam Auditorium, where the reception in connection with the marriage of the 8th respondent's son was held. Those security personnel were never permitted to interfere with free movement of the devotees or other marriage parties, who were there at the temple on 09.09.2021. The stand taken in the affidavit dated 30.09.2021 of the 5th respondent Station House Officer is similar to that taken by the 3rd respondent District Police Chief in the affidavit dated 01.10.2021. The stand taken in the affidavit dated 30.09.2021 filed on behalf of the 8th respondent is that there was no deployment of private security personnel in and around the Kalyanamandapam or Nadappanthal.

60. In view of the provisions under the Guruvayur Devaswom Act, the conduct of any marriage in the Kalyanamandapam in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, on the strength of the permission granted by the authorities under the said Act, can only be subject to the custom and usage in that temple and without adversely affecting in any manner the proper performance of worship by other worshippers. Any control or regulation of the movement of worshippers, in the temple premises can only be by the security staff employed by the Managing Committee or the Police personnel deployed on duty, causing the least inconvenience to the worshippers, especially senior citizens, physically challenged persons and minor children. At any rate, a worshipper conducting marriage in the Kalyanamandapam in the Nadappanthal in front of the temple cannot be permitted to deploy private security personnel to control or regulate the movement of other worshippers in the temple premises. Any private security personnel or persons wearing black dress and acting like 'bouncers' or private 'bodyguards', usually seen along with cine artists and industrialists cannot be permitted to control or regulate the movement of worshippers in the Nadappanthal of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple or in and around Melpathur Auditorium or Poonthanam Auditorium. The Managing Committee shall ensure strict compliance of the above direction, in letter and spirit. The police shall ensure that there is no interference with the free movement of worshippers in and around Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple by any private security personnel or bodyguards.

61. On 29.06.2022, when this DBP came up for consideration, this Court sought clarifications from the learned Standing Counsel for the Managing Committee and also the learned counsel for the 8th respondent, with specific reference to the few screenshots taken from the video that appeared in the online media, which is referred to in paragraph 13 of the order dated 14.09.2021. As per those screenshots, the area on the side of Kalyanamandapams in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple was decorated using Anthurium. The botanical name of Anthurium is 'Anthurium andraeanum', which finds no place in the affidavit filed on behalf of the 8th respondent dated 20.03.2022 furnishing the botanical names of the flowers/leaves used for Pushpalankaaram in the Nadappanthal. One such screenshot regarding decoration on the side of the Kalyanamandapams in the Nadappanthal in front of the temple, which was reproduced in paragraph 1 of the said order, is reproduced hereunder;

62. In connection with the marriage in question, a few cut-outs were placed a few meters away from the Nadappanthal, which is evident from the screenshots re-produced in paragraph 3 of the order dated 29.06.2022, which are reproduced hereunder;

63. During the course of arguments, the learned Standing Counsel for the Managing Committee and also the learned counsel for the 8th respondent would submit that the cut-outs seen in the above screenshots are erected in front of Poonthanam Auditorium, where the marriage reception of the 8th respondent's son was conducted.

64. In C.S.S. Motor Service v. Madras State [AIR 1953 Madras 279] a Division Bench of the Madras High Court held that all public streets and roads vest in the State, but that the State holds them as trustee on behalf of the public. The members of the public are entitled as beneficiaries to use them as a matter of right and this right is limited only by the similar rights possessed by every other citizen to use the pathways. The State as trustees on behalf of the public is entitled to impose all such limitations on the character and extent of the user as may be requisite for protecting the rights of the public generally.

65. In Saghir Ahmad v. State of U.P. [AIR 1954 SC 728 [LQ/SC/1954/130] ] a Constitution Bench of the Apex Court agreed with the statement of law made by the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in Para. 24 of the decision in C.S.S. Motor Service [AIR 1953 Madras 279].

66. In Sodan Singh v. New Delhi Municipal Committee [(1989) 4 SCC 155] [LQ/SC/1989/429] a Constitution Bench of the Apex Court held that the primary object of building roads is undoubtedly to facilitate people to travel from one point to another.

67. In Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and others [2022 (7) KHC 185 [LQ/KerHC/2022/6879 ;] ] a Division Bench of this Court, in which both of us were parties, held that once roads are constructed as per the standards and guidelines prescribed by the Indian Roads Congress, it has to be maintained as such without any encroachment on the right of way or on the pedestrian facilities provided as per such standards and guidelines. Footpaths are not intended for stocking articles for trade or for the display of goods by traders, in front of their shops or establishments. Similarly, footpaths are not intended for the purpose of holding campaigns, demonstrations, etc., by political parties and other organisations, by causing any obstruction whatsoever to the free movement of pedestrians. No political party or organisation can be permitted to encroach upon footpaths or right of way of public roads, in connection with any such protest, demonstrations, etc.; by erecting any temporary structures on the right of way or on the pedestrian facilities, forcing pedestrians including those with disabilities and reduced mobility to walk in unsafe circumstances. In the said decision, this Court noticed that, showing scant regard to the law laid down in the decisions referred to in that order, political parties and various organisations are permitted to put up structures on footpaths and even on the right of way on public roads, all over the State. The protesters/agitators having political backing are even permitted to lay carpet and place chairs on the footpath. On account of such encroachments, pedestrians including those with disabilities and reduced mobility are forced to walk through the right of way of public roads, in unsafe circumstances.

68. In Suo motu v. State of Kerala and others [2022/KER/76999] this Court was dealing with DBP No. 88 of 2022, which was registered suo motu based on a complaint dated 29.11.2022 made by a devotee of Lord Guruvayurappan, alleging encroachments made by traders on both sides of the road leading from Manjulal to Padinjare Nada, erection of huge flex boards in the Nadappanthal, in connection with Vilakku Vazhipadu during Guruvayur Ekadashi, etc. By the order dated 16.12.2022, DBP No. 88 of 2022 was disposed of by holding that, in view of the provisions under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Rules and Regulations made thereunder, the Standards and Guidelines prescribed by the Indian Roads Congress and also the law laid down in the decisions referred to in that order, the roads constructed as per the standards and guidelines prescribed by the Indian Roads Congress has to be maintained as such, without any encroachment on the right of way or on the pedestrian facilities provided as per such standards and guidelines. No political party, organisation or trader can be permitted to encroach upon footpaths or right of way of public roads, in connection with any protests, demonstrations or trade, by erecting any temporary structures on the right of way or on the pedestrian facilities or by stocking articles for trade forcing pedestrians including those with disabilities and reduced mobility to walk in unsafe circumstances. Since the State holds public roads as a trustee on behalf of the public, the inaction on the part of the State and the Local Self Government Institutions in preventing such encroachments upon footpaths or right of way of public roads will amount to breach of trust. Any failure on the part of the designated authorities, contractor, consultant or concessionaire in maintaining the safety standards of public roads will attract the penal consequences provided under Section 198A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. By the order in DBP No. 88 of 2022, the Secretary of Guruvayur Municipality and the Station House Officer, Guruvayur Temple Police Station were directed to prevent encroachment of any nature, in any form, either temporary or permanent, on the right of way or pedestrian facilities on public roads leading to Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, strictly in terms of the law laid down in the decisions referred to supra, to ensure the safety of the road users, including children, senior citizen and differently-abled persons. They were directed to conduct periodical inspections, in order to ensure that roads and pedestrian facilities on the public road leading to Guruvayur Temple are maintained without any encroachments whatsoever. The Administrator, Guruvayur Devaswom was directed to bring it to the notice of the Station House Officer and also the Secretary of Guruvayur Municipality any such encroachments around Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, which would force the road users including those with disabilities and reduced mobility to walk in unsafe circumstances, which shall be acted upon by them, taking note of the law laid down in the decisions referred to supra.

69. In view of the law laid down by this Court in Suo motu [2022/KER/76999], no encroachments can be permitted on the roads and pedestrian facilities in and around Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, by erecting cut-outs, hoardings, etc., forcing the road users including those with disabilities and reduced mobility to walk in unsafe circumstances. Therefore, cutouts similar to that seen in the photographs reproduced hereinbefore at paragraph 60 cannot be permitted in front of Poonthanam Auditorium in connection with any marriage function. It is for the Managing Committee to ensure strict compliance of the above direction, in letter and spirit.

70. In the order dated 29.06.2022, this Court noticed the specific stand taken in the affidavit filed by the 1st respondent Administrator and that filed on behalf of the 8th respondent that Pushpalankaaram in the Nadappanthal is being permitted as a Vazhipadu item in Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple. On similar requests made by certain devotees, the previous Managing Committees have taken favourable decisions.

71. On 04.07.2022 when DBP came up for consideration, based on a query made by this Court, the learned Standing Counsel for the Managing Committee submitted that Pushpalankaaram is not a Vazhipadu item in the published list of Vazhipadu in Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple. The learned counsel for the 8th respondent submitted that, as noticed in the order dated 29.06.2022, the area on the side of the Kalyanamandapams was decorated using Anthurium. However, the said fact was omitted to be mentioned in the affidavit dated 23.02.2022 of the 8th respondent, which is not intentional.

72. On 11.07.2022, the additional 8th respondent filed I.A. No. 1 of 2022, producing therewith Exts. R8(e) to R8(g) as additional documents. The document marked as Ext. R8(g) is two photographs of floral decorations in Thirumala Thirupathi Temple using Anthurium and another photograph regarding Pushpalankaaram in Sabarimala Sannidhanam. The photograph showing Pushpalankaaram in Sabarimala Sannidhanam is reproduced hereunder;

The photograph showing floral decorations in Thirumala Thirupathi Temple is re-produced hereunder;

73. The 8th respondent has furnished the details of the flowers/leaves used for Pushpalankaaram in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple and also the botanical name of those flowers/leaves, along with an affidavit dated 20.03.2022. The said details are as follows;

Flower/Leaves	Botanical Name
Monster Leaf	Monstera Dcliciosa
Family Path	Cyclea Pcltata
Podocarpus	Podocarpus Macrophylus
Jamaica	Hibiscus Sabdariffa
Ivy Leaf	Hedera
Tube Rose	Polyanthes Tuberosa
Carnation	Dianthus Caryophyllus
Orchid	Orchidaceae
Betel Leaf	Piper Betle
Lotus	Nelumbo Nucifera
Jasmine	Jasminum

74. In the affidavit dated 20.03.2022, the 8th respondent has stated that, only natural leaves were used in the decorations. No artificial flowers or leaves were used at any place so as to offend the temple custom and practices. In the order dated 04.07.2022, this Court noticed the submission made by the learned counsel for the 8th respondent that, the side of the Mandapams was decorated with Anthurium, the botanical name of which is 'Anthurium andraeanum'. However, the said fact was omitted to be mentioned in the affidavit dated 23.02.2022 of the 8th respondent, which is not intentional.

75. During the pendency of this DBP, the Special Commissioner, Sabarimala filed SSCR No. 13 of 2022 regarding the Vazhipadu item Pushpalankaaram in Sabarimala Sannidhanam, producing therewith a few photographs of Pushpalankaaram. As per those photographs, decorative flowers, flower garlands, flower bouquets, etc., were being used for Pushpalankaram to decorate the lower portion of the roof of the Sreekovil, Valiambalam in front of Sreekovil, the entrance of Balikalpura, the bottom portion of the Golden Flag-mast, Upadevatha Shrines, etc. The stem of the flowers is inserted in a sponge-like wet material. To keep the flowers fresh in the sponge, water or other artificial substance is sprayed. Two photographs, which were produced along with the report of the Special Commissioner, which are extracted in paragraph 18 of the order dated 18.11.2022, is re-produced hereunder;

76. By the order dated 18.11.2022, this Court disposed of SSCR No. 13 of 2022 - Suo motu v. State of Kerala [2023 (1) KHC 359]. In the said order, this Court noticed that, prior to the order of this Court dated 28.03.2022 in SSCR No. 10 of 2022, Pushpalankaaram was conducted at Sabarimala Sannidhanam using flower garlands, 'flower bouquets', etc., even obstructing the view of 'Ashtadikpalakar' in the bottom portion of the golden flag-mast. The golden pillars and walls of Valiyambalam are also covered by hanging flower bouquets. The Special Commissioner, Sabarimala has stated that, on most occasions, decorative flowers of various colours and varieties, flower garlands, etc. are brought from other States and cities like Bangalore. The stem of the flowers is inserted in a sponge-like wet material. To keep the flowers fresh, the sponge is sprayed with water or some other artificial substance. In the order in SSCR No. 13 of 2022, this Court held that floral decorations in the photographs reproduced in the said order cannot be termed as Pushpalankaram in a temple. Such decorations, with flowers normally used in auditoriums for floral decorations, cannot be permitted in temples, where Pushpalankaram should be in the traditional way using marigold or other types of flowers used in temples for Pushpabishekam or for conducting poojas, as per Paditharam. No floral decorations can be permitted in the bottom portion of the golden flag-mast, since any such decorations will obstruct the view of Ashtadikpalakar.

77. In Suo motu [2023 (1) KHC 359], this Court noticed that as per the opinion of the Tantri, which was dated 25.10.2022, for Pushpalankaram in Sabarimala Devaswom all flowers used for Pushpabhishekam and for poojas inside the temple can be used. Pushpalankaram can be permitted only in places other than the Sreekovil and flag-mast. In the counter affidavit of the Travancore Devaswom Board, it was stated that the Board proposes to do Pushpalankaram by itself, in a moderate way, using the flowers permitted for Pushpabhishekam and other poojas in the temple as per Paditharam in the places permitted by the Tantri. By the order dated 18.11.2022, SSCR No. 13 of 2022 was disposed of by restraining the Travancore Devaswom Board from permitting Pushpalankaaram by the devotees at Sabarimala Sannidhanam. However, the Board was permitted to do Pushpalankaaram by itself, in a moderate way using flowers permitted for Pushpabhishekam or for conducting poojas in Sabarimala Sannidhanam as per Paditharam, in the places permitted by the Tantri in the opinion dated 25.10.2022, without obstructing the view of pillars and walls of Valiyambalam, which are covered by golden plates. Paragraphs 31 to 34 and also the last paragraph of the order dated 18.11.2022 read thus;

"31. In view of the provisions under Sections 15A, 25 and 31 of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, the Travancore Devaswom Board is duty bound to see that the regular traditional rites and ceremonies according to the practice prevalent in Sabarimala are performed promptly; to administer Sabarimala Devaswom in accordance with recognised usages; and to make proper arrangements for the conduct of daily worship and ceremonies and of the festivals in Sabarimala, according to its usage.

32. Tantri of a temple is responsible for the proper conduct of poojas and other religious ceremonies in accordance with Sasthras. The Tantri is the chief priest of the Devaswom, who has a vital role in the temple. The Travancore Devaswom Board as well as the Tantri of Sabarimala has to ensure that regular traditional rites and ceremonies according to the practice prevalent in Sabarimala are performed promptly and to make proper arrangements for the conduct of daily worship and ceremonies and of the festivals in Sabarimala, according to its usage.

33. When the average footfall at Sabarimala reaches 80,000-90,000 pilgrims per day during Mandala-Makaravilakku festival seasons, 70 to 80 pilgrims will have to move through the barricades in front of the Sopanam of Sabarimala Sannidhanam, in a minute, in order to ensure that all the pilgrims have darshan of Lord Ayyappa when the Sanctum Sanctorum remains open. The guards and Police officers on duty have to regulate the movement of pilgrims through the barricades in front of the Sopanam, in an appropriate manner, causing the least inconvenience to the pilgrims, in order to ensure a smooth flow of pilgrims.

34. When 'Pushpalankaram' is not a vazhipadu item at Sabarimala Sannidhanam either in 'Paditharam' or 'Pathivu Register', merely on the ground that some of the devotees, who are affluent are willing to offer it as Vazhipadu, the Travancore Devaswom Board should not have permitted 'Pushpalankaram', as seen in the photographs reproduced hereinbefore. As evident from the photograph reproduced hereinbefore at paragraph 23, the pillars and walls of Valiyambalam are covered with golden plates. As evident from the photograph reproduced hereinbefore at paragraph 24, those pillars and walls are covered using flower garlands, 'flower bouquets', etc. 'Pushpalankaram' is permitted even obstructing the view of 'Ashtadikpalakar' in the bottom portion of the golden flag-mast. At any rate, 'Pushpalankaram' covering the pillars and walls of Valiyambalam which are covered with golden plates, will not add to the overall beauty of the temple, as claimed by the Travancore Devaswom Board. Such floral decorations normally seen in auditoriums cannot be permitted in Sabarimala Temple, which is not a 'tourist spot', but a 'holy pilgrim destination', where Pushpalankaram should be in the traditional way with flowers used in Sabarimala for 'Pushpabhishekam' or for conducting poojas as per 'Paditharam'. At any rate, no floral decorations can be permitted in the railings on the bottom portion of the golden flag-mast, obstructing the view of 'Ashtadikpalakar'.

In the above circumstances, this SSCR is disposed of by restraining the Travancore Devaswom Board from permitting 'Pushpalankaram' by devotees at Sabarimala Sannidhanam. However, the Board is permitted to do 'Pushpalankaram' by itself, in a moderate way using flowers permitted for 'Pushpabhishekam' or for conducting poojas in Sabarimala Sannidhanam as per 'Paditharam', in the places permitted by the Tantri in Annexure R2(d) opinion, without obstructing the view of pillars and walls of Valiyambalam, which are covered with golden plates."

78. In the instant case, Pushpalankaaram is not a Vazhipadu item in the published list of Vazhipadu in Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple. The pleadings and materials on record would show that based on the request made by the devotees, the Managing Committee is permitting Pushpalankaaram in the temple and also in the Nadappanthal in front of the temple, without collecting any amount from the devotees. The activities undertaken in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, by the contractor engaged by the 8th respondent is evident from the photographs, which forms part of the online media report, based on which this DBP was registered suo motu, by the proceedings dated 06.09.2021. Huge cut-outs, branches of trees, etc. were used for decorating the Nadappanthal. In the affidavit dated 10.09.2021 of the 1st respondent Administrator it is stated that the Event Management Group engaged by the 8th respondent started preliminary works on 04.09.2021 in the Nadappanthal, in connection with the marriage scheduled to be held on 09.09.2021. On 05.09.2021, certain works other than Pushpalankaaram were noticed and therefore, the workers were instructed to dismantle the same. The photographs of the work undertaken by the 8th respondent in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, which form part of the news item that appeared in the online media referred to above, are reproduced hereunder;

79. On 06.09.2021 at 4.00 p.m., when this DBP was taken up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel for the Managing Committee, on instructions, submitted that the cutouts, branches of trees, etc. used for decorating the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple has already been removed. The learned Standing Counsel made available for the perusal of this Court two photographs taken at 3.15 p.m., which are reproduced hereunder;

80. On 07.09.2021, when this DBP came up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel submitted that the Managing Committee has taken a decision on 12.02.2021 to permit Pushpalankaaram in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, in connection with the marriage of the 8th respondent's son. Three screenshots of the decorated Nadappanthal taken from the news item with video that appeared in online media, referred to in paragraph 13 of the order dated 14.09.2021, are reproduced hereunder;

81. As noticed in the order dated 14.09.2021, instead of Pushpalankaaram, the pillars and the ceiling of the Nadappanthal in front of the temple were decorated mainly with ornamental leaves and decorative hangings, with few flowers, as usually done while conducting marriages in auditoriums. Such activities cannot be permitted in the Nadappanthal of a temple, which is intended for the movement of devotees, including children of tender age, senior citizens and persons with disabilities. Such flowers and ornamental leaves used for decoration are usually brought from other States and cities like Bangalore. The stem of the flowers are inserted in a sponge-like wet material to keep the flowers fresh. The sponge and also the flowers are being sprayed with water and other artificial substances. Such ornamental leaves and flowers used for decorating auditoriums cannot be permitted to be used in temple premises, since the children of tender age, who have a tendency to touch such ornamental leaves and flowers used for decorating the pillars of the Nadappanthal, will be exposed to such artificial substances sprayed to keep the leaves and flowers fresh. At any rate, the decoration of the Nadappanthal of a temple with ornamental leaves and decorative hangings, with few flowers cannot be termed as Pushpalankaaram. Such activities cannot be permitted in the Nadappanthal of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple. Admittedly, Pushpalankaaram is not a Vazhipadu item in the published list of Vazhipadu in Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple. During temple festivals, the Nadappanthal in Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple can be decorated in the traditional way, by the Managing Committee. Every day large number of devotees, including children of tender age, senior citizens and persons with disabilities are having darshan at Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple. The endeavour of the Managing Committee, in discharge of its statutory duties under Section 10 of the Guruvayur Devaswom Act, should be to provide facilities for proper performance of worship by the devotees, instead of giving permission to a class of devotees to perform Pushpalankaaram in the Nadappanthal, after availing the services of Event Management Groups.

82. In Suo motu [2022/KER/76999] one of the grievances of the devotee of Lord Guruvayurappan, who made a complaint dated 29.11.2022, based on which DBP No. 88 of 2022 was registered suo motu was that, huge flex boards were erected in connection with Vilakku Vazhipadu during Guruvayur Ekadashi. On 16.12.2022, when that DBP came up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel for the Managing Committee submitted that flex boards erected in the Nadappanthal of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple by those who offered Vilakku Vazhipadu during Guruvayur Ekadashi have already been removed. In the order dated 16.12.2022, this Court has made it clear that a 'worshipper', who shows reverence and adoration for Lord Guruvayurappan, is duty bound to exercise his right to worship in an accustomed manner and subject to the practice and tradition in Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple. A worshipper of Lord Guruvayurappan or a group of worshippers who offer Vilakku Vazhipadu during Guruvayur Ekadashi cannot erect flex boards in the Nadappanthal or in the premises of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple. Therefore, it was held that the Managing Committee cannot permit a worshipper or a group of worshippers, who offer Vazhipadu in Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, to erect flex boards in the Nadappanthal or in the premises of the temple. The Managing Committee and the Administrator were directed to ensure that no such incidents are repeated in Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple in future.

83. As already found hereinbefore at paragraph 58, the 8th respondent was permitted to conduct the marriage of his son in the Kalyanamandapam in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Temple, openly flouting the restriction imposed in connection with Covid-19 pandemic, with the active connivance of the then Managing Committee of Guruvayur Devaswom. On 09.09.2021 at 2.45 p.m., the vehicle carrying the 8th respondent Ravi Pillai and cine actor Mohanlal was permitted entry through the Nadappanthal, upto Bhagavathy Temple, in the presence of Sri. K.V. Shaji, a member of the then Managing Committee, who was arrayed as the 5th respondent in DBP No. 21 of 2021. By the order dated 21.06.2022 in DBP No. 21 of 2021 - Suo motu v. Managing Committee and others [2022 (6) KLT 849] - it was directed that the practice of permitting a class of worshippers to bring their vehicles upto Bhagavathy Temple through the Nadappanthal, with the active support of the Members of the Managing Committee or the Administrator has to be stopped with immediate effect. We record the submission made, during the course of arguments, by the learned Standing Counsel for the Managing Committee that the above direction contained in the order of this Court in DBP No. 21 of 2021 is being implemented strictly. We deprecate in the strongest words the conduct of the 1st respondent Administrator and also the 8th respondent in filing affidavits before this Court with twisted facts, with reference to the restrictions imposed by the Managing Committee in the conduct of marriages in the premises of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, in connection with Covid-19 pandemic. It is ordered that, in view of the law laid down by this Court in Suo motu v. State of Kerala and others [2022/KER/76999], no encroachments can be permitted on the roads and pedestrian facilities in and around Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, by erecting cut-outs, hoardings, etc. forcing the road users including those with disabilities and reduced mobility to walk in unsafe circumstances. Therefore, cut-outs similar to those seen in the photographs re-produced hereinbefore at paragraph 60 cannot be permitted in front of Poonthanam Auditorium in connection with any marriage function. The conduct of any marriage in the Kalyanamandapam in the Nadappanthal in front of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple can only be subject to the custom and usage in that temple and without adversely affecting in any manner the proper performance of worship by other worshippers. Any control or regulation of the movement of worshippers in the temple premises can only be by the security staff employed by the Managing Committee or the police personnel deployed on duty. No private security personnel or persons wearing black dress and acting like 'bouncers' or private 'bodyguards' cannot be permitted to control or regulate the movement of worshippers in the Nadappanthal of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple or in and around Melpathur Auditorium or Poonthanam Auditorium. The decoration of the Nadappanthal of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple with ornamental leaves and decorative hangings, as done by the 8th respondent in connection with the marriage of his son, cannot be permitted by the Managing Committee. During temple festivals, the Nadappanthal can be decorated in the traditional way, by the Managing Committee. In terms of the order in Suo motu v. State of Kerala and others [2022/KER/76999], a worshipper or group of worshippers, who offer Vilakku Vazhipadu during Guruvayur Ekadashi, cannot be permitted to erect flex boards in the Nadappanthal or in the premises of the temple.

84. In the judgment dated 09.11.2022 in W.P.(C) No. 6657 of 2007 - K. Arunkumar v. State of Kerala and others [2022/KER/76057] - this Court directed Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee to take necessary steps to protect the interest of aged devotees in the premises of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple, by providing them food and medicine. By that judgment the Managing Committee was also directed to consider the question of providing such aged devotees in the temple premises, safe shelter during night. It is for the Managing Committee to provide such facilities to the devotees.

85. With the above directions, this DBP is disposed of.