Supreme Court on Monday upheld the rights of the erstwhile royal family of Travancore in the administration and management of Sree Padmanabhaswamy temple in Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala. The temple came into limelight as one of the richest temples in the country after the discovery of wealth locked in ‘kallaras’ (vaults) for centuries. Today’s verdict by a two judge bench of Justices U U Lalit and Indu Malhotra has now put an end to a nine year old legal battle.
Reversing the Kerala High Court’s 2011 order that the rights of the royal family ceased to exist after the death of the last ruler of Travancore in 1991, the Supreme Court said the death of the last ruler will not result in revocation of rights of the family in favour of the Kerala government.
The top court further said that the death will not affect the rights of shebaitship (right to manage the financial affairs of the deity) of the family over the deity and they will survive as per custom. The court also approved the constitution of an interim committee headed by District Judge, Thiruvananthapuram to manage the affairs of the temple till a new committee is formed. The ruling ends the legal battle the temple and members of the royal family have fought with the government for decades over control of one of the richest temples in the world.
This temple is one of the major tourist attractions in Kerala. Sree Padmanabhaswamy Temple, one of the 108 sacred Vishnu temples or Divya Desams in India, displays a supreme blend of Kerala and Dravidian styles of architecture. Located at East Fort, in Thiruvananthapuram, the capital city of Kerala, the temple is also known by the name Sree Ananda Padmanabhaswamy Temple, for the presiding deity Lord Vishnu is seen reclining on Anantha, the hooded Serpent. The word Thiruvananthapuram literally means the land of Sree Anantha Padmanabhaswamy.
Incidentally this is second major decision on Kerala traditions, which Justice Indu Malhotra has been part of. In September 2018, she gave the only dissenting judgement in a 4-1 verdict by SC bench allowing entry of women of all ages in Sabrimala temple. She was also the part of the bench which in November 2019 referred all review petitions on Sabrimala case to a seven judge bench by a 3-2 verdict. This time she was in the favour of the judgement.
The central legal question in Padmanabhaswamy temple case was whether Utradam Thirunal Marthanda Varma, the younger brother of Chithira Thirunal Balarama Varma, the last Ruler of Travancore, could claim to be the “Ruler of Travancore” after the death of the ruler in 1991. The court examined this claim within the limited meaning of that term according to the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950 to claim ownership, control and management of the ancient Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple.
Reacting to the Supreme Court’s verdict, Travancore royal family member Adithya Varma said, “We wholeheartedly welcome the judgment. It re-establishes our family’s connection with Lord Sree Padmanabha. The family is happy about it. We are looking forward to reading the full verdict.”
“Great God’s will prevailed. Will say more about it after going through the whole verdict,” said Princess Gowri Lakshmibai of the erstwhile Travancore royal family soon after the judgment.
Devotees came out in large numbers and distributed sweets before the sixth century temple, situated in the heart of the state capital Thiruvananthapuram. Some devotees were even seen crying before the temple. The Kerala state government welcomed the verdict.
Commenting on the judgement state Devaswom minister Kadakampally Surendran said, “We are bound to go by the verdict. We have always followed the apex court order in letter and spirit. It’s the government’s duty to implement and comply with its verdict.”
A long legal battle with a longer history
Back on April 10, 2019, the sane Supreme Court bench had reserved its judgement on the pleas challenging the January 31, 2011 verdict of the Kerala High Court in the matter. The Kerala High Court had ordered the state government to set up a body or trust to take control of the temple, its assets and management to run the temple in accordance with old traditions.
However, the top court stayed the High Court’s order on May 2, 2011, and also directed that there shall be a detailed inventory of the articles, valuables, ornaments in Kallaras (vaults) which had long rumoured to be holding immense riches.
When five its six vaults, known as ‘Kallara’ in Malayalam, were opened in line with the court order, vast treasure of gold and other priceless objects were discovered. It was estimated that the intrinsic value of the treasure amounted to more than Rs 90,000 crore. One of the vaults, Kallara B could not be opened and the opening of the same was later kept in abeyance by the apex court.
In August 2012, senior advocate Gopal Subramanium was appointed Amicus Curiae (friend of the court) by the Supreme Court. Subramanium submitted a voluminous report before the court in April 2014 alleging serious mismanagement of the temple by the trust and indicting the royal family on various counts. The temple was under the control of a trust headed by the ex-royals’ family until April 2014 when the top court by way of a crucial interim order handed over its management to a four-member administrative committee headed by a district judge.
The legal genesis of the dispute lies in the agreement of accession (agreement) signed between the Kings of Travancore with the Government of India in 1949 by which the princely state of Travancore became a part of the Indian Union. Article VII of the agreement provided that administration of the Padmanabha Swamy temple shall be conducted, subject to the control and supervision of the ruler of Travancore, by an executive officer appointed by the ruler.
Later in July 2017, the Supreme Court had asserted that it would examine the claims that one of the ‘kallaras’ of the temple contained “extraordinary” treasure and “mystical” energy. The apex court’s assertions had come after senior advocate Gopal Subramaniam told it that ‘Kallara’ (vault) B of the temple should be opened as it was closed “on the apprehension that there is some mystical energy”.
Association of Travancore royal family with the temple
It should be noted that the Sree Padmanabhaswamy Temple was rebuilt in its present form in the 18th century by the Travancore Royal House which ruled Southern Kerala and some parts of Tamil Nadu till 1947. Even after India’s independence, the temple continued to be governed by a trust controlled by the erstwhile royal family for whom Lord Padmanabha (Vishnu) is their family deity.
All the temples which were under the control and management of the erstwhile Princely States of Travancore and Cochin were under the control of the Travancore and Cochin Devaswom Boards before 1947. However, as per the Instrument of Accession signed between the princely states and the Government of India, since 1949, the administration of the Padmanabhaswamy Temple was “vested in trust” in the Ruler of Travancore. The state of Kerala was carved out in 1956 but the temple continued to be managed by the erstwhile royals.
In 1971, privy purses to the former royals were abolished through a constitutional amendment stripping their entitlements and privileges. The move was upheld in court in 1993 and the last ruler of Travancore who died during the pendency of this case continued to manage the affairs of the temple till then.
In 1991, when the last ruler’s brother took over the temple management, it created a furore among devotees who moved the courts leading to a long-drawn legal battle. The government joined in; supporting the claims of the petitioner that Marthanda Varma had no legal right to claim the control or management of the temple.
The character of the temple was always recognised as a public institution governed by a statute. The argument of the royal family is that the temple management would vest with them for perpetuity, as per custom. Even though the last ruler Balarama Varma executed a detailed will bequeathing his personal properties, he had not included the Sree Padmanabhaswamy Temple as his personal property or dealt with it in his will.
A consequence of who has administrative rights over the temple is whether the vaults of the temple will be opened. In 2007, Marthanda Varma claimed that the treasures of the temple were the family property of the royals. Several suits were filed objecting to this claim and a lower court in Kerala passed an injunction against the opening of the vaults. Case further moved to High court and then to the Supreme Court.
(Input from various sources, references and agencies)
You must be logged in to post a comment.