RECENTLY KERALA HIGH COURT DISMISSED WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION FILED BY FATHER ON BEHALF OF HIS 10- YEAR OLD GIRL FOR SEEKING AN ORDER TO ENTER SABARIMALA TEMPLE. THE SAME IS DISMISSED IN LIGHT OF REVIEW PENDING ON THE SAID ISSUE BEFORE THE LARGER BENCH OF THE APEX COURT.
BRIEF FACTS
10 year old girl filed a writ petition before the Kerala HIgh Court seeking relief of mandamus seeking directions to Travancore Devaswom Board to allow her to offer pilgrimage to Sabarimala Temple without taking into account the restrictions of age since she has not attained puberty or in the alternative to allow the request of the minor on sympathetic grounds.
It is contended by the Petitioner that they are planning to visit the temple since long and it has been delayed due to onset of Covid earlier. Now, the family is under distress and also the father of Petitioner is not in good health. Hence, they have applied the same online but since in the meanwhile the age of Petitioner has crossed 10 years, thus, her plea was rejected in the online process.
Aggrieved by the same the Petitioner through her father has come up to file the present writ petition.
It is contended that the Petitioner has not attained puberty and thus the bar to entry in the temple is not applicable to the Petitioner. Moreover, they have also placed a copy of the judgment passed by Division Bench of this Court, in this it was held that in case the girl has not attained puberty, there is no bar to offer pilgrimage to the temple. It is also contended that the upper limit of 10 years is only fixed for the convenience and not to taken in the literal terms.
In response, the Respondents filed a counter statement wherein it is averred that the issue raised in this writ petition is directly under issue before the Larger Bench of the Apex in a review petition which is pending adjudication. In light of same, the Travancore Board is unable to take any stand contrary to law already settled. Further, it is pleaded that since the Mandala Festival for which the permission to offer pilgrimage is sought for is already over, therefore the writ petition is not maintainable in its present form.
The petitioner thereafter sought amendment to this effect and said that since festival is over thus there would not be much crowd and it would be convenient for the Petitioner to offer pilgrimage. Further, it is again stated that since petitioner has not attained the age of puberty, thus, in accordance with the law laid down in S. Mahendran (AIR 1993 Kerala 43), wherein DB of this Court held that in case the age of puberty is not attained, no bar to the entry of the temple.
CONCLUSION
Court observed that the law laid in S. Mahendran cited above has been referred to a Larger Bench of the Apex Court in Case titled Young Lawyers Association vs State of Kerala (2019), wherein the interplay between the Article 25, which prescribes equal rights to all for practicing any religion vis -a-vis Articles 14 is still pending. The Court while dismissing the present writ petition observed that during the pendency of the matter before the Larger Bench of the Apex Court, it has no jurisdiction to entertain the present writ and hence dismissed.
Comments
Post a Comment