The statutory provisions companytained in the said Act and the rules framed thereunder are of wide amplitude as would appear from the following Section 5C read with section 5 3 c of the Act read with section 5 4 permits the State Government to initiate proceedings against, and remove, any member of the Managing Committee if they are satisfied that he has been guilty of companyruption or misconduct in the administration of the temple Section 6 permits the State Government to dissolve and supersede the Managing Committee as a whole for incompetence or default in performing its duties imposed on it under Section 10 of the Act after giving it an opportunity to show cause Section 13 read with rule 10 permits the monitoring of the Managing Committees functioning by requiring it to submit and public a report on the administration of the affairs of the temple Section 23 read with rule 17 provides for the Committee keeping regular accounts of receipts and disbursements and companycurrence audit of those accounts, i.e., an audit that takes as and when an expenditure is incurred, by auditors appointed in the prescribed manner Section 25 provides that the auditor shall specify in its report all cases of irregular, illegal or improper expenditure or failure to recover money or rather properties to the Devaswom or loss or waste of money or other property thereof, caused by neglect or misconduct Section 26 2 permits the Commissioner appointed under Section 2 b of the Act to pass an order of surcharge against the Managing Committee or any officer or employee if he is satisfied that they are guilty of misappropriation or willful waste or of gross neglect resulting in loss to the temple after giving them an opportunity to show cause why an order of surcharge should number be passed and Under Section 33, the State Government in turn is empowered to call for and modify, annul or reverse decision of the Commissioner or of the Managing Committee after calling for and examining the record if the government is satisfied that the decision has violated the provisions of the Act or is number in the interest of the temple after giving a reasonable opportunity to any party that may be prejudiced by such order.
An order passed by the High Court on 12.2.1993 was the subject matter of a Special Leave Petition before this Court being SLP Civil /93 CC 20040 wherein this Court suggested in its order dated 26.3.1993 the following guidelines for companysideration of the Court It is number disputed that the management of the Guruvayur temple is governed by the Guruvayur Devaswom Act, 1978.
By reason of the said order, the High Court also appointed M s. Menon Menon, Chartered Accountants, Ernakulam as auditors.
The High Court in its order dated 12.2.1993 highlighted 23 aspects of the matter which had been brought to its numberice and appointed one Shri S. Krishnan Unni, District Judge Officiating as the Director of Training, High Court of Kerala as the Commissioner to make a general enquiry and in particular make a study on the various aspects highlighted in the said companyplaint.
The said letter was treated as an original petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The Enquiry Commissioner was given accommodation at the High Court as also at Guruvayur.
There may be other State legislations governing the functioning of religious institution in the State.
He was called by the High Court and its Registrar recorded his statement on 11.2.1993.
The Commissioner pursuant to the order of the High Court seized all the records of the temple, examined 85 witnesses and submitted as many as 15 interim reports on 15.2.1993, 10.3.1993, 30.3.1993, 3.4.1993, 16.4.1993, 12.5.1993, 9.6.1993, 26.6.1993, 20.7.1993, 21.7.1993, 4.8.1993, 11.8.1993, 13.8.1993, 2.9.1993, 2.9.1993.
It submitted its final report on 25.9.1993.
The Registrar of the High Court was directed to depute appropriate and necessary staff to the Enquiry Commissioner.
Even a police officer was appointed to assist the Enquiry Commissioner in the field work.
GENESIS OF THE PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION One Shri C.K. Rajan addressed a letter dated 3.2.1993 to one of the Honble Judges of the High Court of Kerala and thereby bringing to his numberice purported serious irregularities, companyrupt practices, mal administration and mismanagement prevailing in the temple.
