HC upholds LDF Govt.'s decision

By Our Staff Reporter

KOCHI, AUG. 10. A Division Bench of the Kerala High Court on Friday upheld the Left Democratic Front Government's actions in taking over the management of the Sree Narayana Dharma Sanghom Trust, its assets and properties and appointing an administrator to manage its affairs.

The Bench, comprising Mr. Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan and Mr. Justice G. Sasidharan, also directed the Advisory Council to finalise the voters list within six weeks from today. The Government had also been directed to complete the election process within one month on the basis of the final list.

The court ordered that steps be taken to conduct a smooth election and put the elected trust board in office immediately.

The Bench ordered fresh election as the court felt that the term of the ousted board was over and there was no question of putting them back in office. Therefore, the only alternative was to conduct fresh elections, the court said.

The judges directed that the voters list already prepared by the Advisory Council be treated as a preliminary list. The Bench said that the Advisory Council should hear all the parties and consider their objections before finalising the voters list.

The directives were issued by the judges while disposing of three writ petitions challenging the action of the Thiruvananthapuram District Magistrate (District Collector) in taking possession of the Sivagiri Madhom (headquarters of the trust), the promulgation of the Sivagiri Mutt (Emergency Provision) Ordinance, 1997 and the Sivagiri Mutt (Emergency Provision) Act 1997 which replaced the ordinance.

The petitions were filed by Swami Prakasananda and Swami Visudhananda, former president and general secretary respectively of the trust, and others. The law and order situation created by the two factions of the sanyasis had resulted in the takeover of the madhom by the Government.

Upholding the ordinance and the Act, the judges pointed out that the Entry I of List II(State List) of the Seventh Schedule when read with Article 246(3)(power to make law regarding the matters under State list) made it clear that the legislature was competent to make laws with regard to matters involving public order. The takeover was only a temporary measure for maintaining public peace and tranquility. Therefore, the ordinance and Act did not suffer from any legal infirmity.

The petitioners had contended that the Act had come in conflict with the freedom of religion enjoyed by them since the trust was owned by a religious denomination. Citing various works of Sree Narayana Guru, the judges pointed out that the Guru who established the trust could not be characterised as Guru who established a religion. Nor could his disciples be characterised as belonging to that religious denomination. The Guru had never advocated or argued for a particular religion. He had worked for the eradication of castes and untouchability and religious fanaticism. Therefore, these would show that the petitioners did not belong to a particular religious denomination so as to claim right under Article 25 and 26 of the Constitution (freedom of religion and freedom to manage the affairs of religion).

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Southern States
Previous : Over 1 lakh students to take part in Rural IT
           Quiz 2001
Next     : Six students killed in mishaps