IN THE SUPREME COURT OF (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction) SLP (Civil) No.11295 of 2011

IN THE MATTER OF:

Sri & Anr. … Petitioners Versus T.P. Sundararajan & Ors. … Respondents

WITH

SLP (Civil) No. 17081-17082 of 2011

Rama Varma … Petitioner Versus T.P. Sundararajan & Ors. … Respondents

AND

SLP (Civil) No. 12361 of 2011

Uthradam Thirunal Marthanda Varma & Anr. … Petitioners Versus Union of India & Ors. … Respondents

REPORT OF THE AMICUS CURIAE

Filed through: Ardhendumauli Kumar Prasad, Advocate-on-Record

Contents

I. A brief background of the dispute ...... 4

II. History and traditions of the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple ...... 42

III. Recommendations of the Amicus Curiae ...... 64

A. Submission of future interim reports ...... 66

B. Strengthening of vaults ...... 66

C. Storage of inventory data ...... 67

D. Adverse reports by the Home Department of the Government of

...... 68

E. Restraint on the media ...... 70

F. Suggested steps for effective Temple Administration ...... 71

G. Implementation of security measures ...... 72

H. Extension of time for inventorisation ...... 74

I. Recommendations on Temple renovation and restoration ...... 74

J. Compiling the Temple’s traditions ...... 74

K. Audit of Temple accounts and sources of funding ...... 75

L. Listing the Temple as a World Heritage Site ...... 77

M. Next steps on representations made to the Amicus Curiae ...... 78

N. Supplementary Recommendations ...... 78

IV. Epilogue ...... 91

Page 2 of 93

IN THE (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction) SLP (Civil) No.11295 of 2011

IN THE MATTER OF:

Sri Marthanda Varma & Anr. … Petitioners Versus T.P. Sundararajan & Ors. … Respondents

WITH

SLP (Civil) No. 17081-17082 of 2011

Rama Varma … Petitioner Versus T.P. Sundararajan & Ors. … Respondents

AND

SLP (Civil) No. 12361 of 2011

Uthradam Thirunal Marthanda Varma & Anr. … Petitioners Versus Union of India & Ors. … Respondents

REPORT OF THE AMICUS CURIAE

1. This Hon’ble Court appointed the Amicus Curiae on 23rd August 2012.

Thereafter, the Amicus Curiae visited , Kerala,

between 28th and 30th September, 2012, to assess first-hand the

administration and general state of affairs at the Sree Padmanabha

Swamy Temple. This report is the result of the Amicus Curiae’s review of

the Temple premises (including the vaults, or ‘Kallaras’ as they are

Page 3 of 93

called in , that house the treasures of the Temple); his

interaction with the State Government which was represented by the

Chief Minister and the Chief Secretary; and the Royal family of the

erstwhile State of , which was represented by His Highness

Sri Marthanda Varma, Princess Gouri Bayi and Sri Adithya

Varma; as well as members of the Temple staff, such as the priests and

the administrators; and equally importantly, members of the Overseeing

and Expert Committee1.

2. Of course, no review of a temple as unique and famous as the Sree

Padmanabha Swamy Temple can be undertaken or completed without

understanding and appreciating its history and heritage that stretches

back thousands of years. The Amicus Curiae has therefore spent a

number of hours studying with keen interest, the history and the rituals

of this great Temple, which have informed many of his

recommendations and suggestions in this report.

3. This report is divided into four parts: Part I provides an overview of the

dispute before this Hon’ble Court; Part II discusses the history and

heritage of the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple; Part III contains the

recommendations and suggestions of the Amicus Curiae; while Part IV is

an epilogue.

I. A BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE DISPUTE

1. The present Special Leave Petitions are directed against the judgment

and order of the Kerala High Court dated 31st January 2011 rendered in

Writ Petition (Civil) No. 36487 of 2009 (T.P. Sundararajan v. State of Kerala

& Ors.) and Writ Petition (Civil) No. 4256 of 2010 (Uthradam Thirunal

1 A list of the participants of the meeting held on 29th September 2012 at the office of the Expert Committee is annexed with this report and marked as Annexure A.

Page 4 of 93

Marthanda Varma and Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple Represented by the

Executive Officer v. Union of India). By a common judgment, the Division

Bench of the Kerala High Court essentially held that, upon the death of

the last Ruler of the erstwhile State of Travancore on 20th July 1991, the

Petitioner (His Highness Sri Marthanda Varma) did not step into the

shoes of the last Ruler and could not therefore claim management rights

over the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple under the provisions of the

Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950. Though the

High Court also held that the Executive Officer of the Temple was

appointed without any legal authority, the Court chose not to interfere

with that appointment.

2. Consequently, the High Court passed a series of directions in exercise of

its jurisdiction as ‘parens patriae’, and concluded that the Temple and its

properties and assets would revert back and vest in the State

Government under Article 295 and Article 296 of the Constitution of

India. Thus, in order to preserve the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple,

as well as its treasures, it was the duty of the State Government to make

arrangements in the same way as in the case of State-run temples that

were handed over to the (State) Devaswom Board.

3. The Kerala High Court even observed that:

“There is no purpose in keeping the treasures of the Temple acquired by it in the course of several centuries as a mystery and if all the storage rooms (kallaras) are opened and the treasures are exhibited in the museum to be set up in the Temple compound, the glory of the Temple and the State will get a boost and probably the great Temple will become a major tourist attraction and income earner.”

4. The Kerala High Court therefore ordered that:-

“i) There shall be a direction to the State Government to immediately take steps to constitute a body corporate trust or other legal

Page 5 of 93

authority to take over the control of the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple, it’s assets and management to regulate the same in accordance with all the traditions hitherto followed. This shall be done within a period of three months from now. ii) There will be an order of injunction against the Petitioners in Writ Petition (C) No.4256/2010 who are Respondents 3 and 5 in the other W.P. (C) against the opening of any of the Kallaras or removing any of the articles from the Temple. However, they are free to use such of the articles required for rituals, ceremonies and regular poojas in the Temple until Temple is taken over by the authority as stated above. iii) There will be a direction to the authority constituted by the Government to open all kallaras, make inventory of the entire articles and create a museum and exhibit all the treasures of the Temple for the public, devotees and the tourists to view the same which could be arranged on payment basis in the Temple premises itself. The first Petitioner in W.P. (C) No.4256/2010 and the successors from the Royal family should be permitted to participate in the rituals of the Temple like the Arattu procession, which is symbolic of the presence of the “Padmanabhadasa” in the Festival. iv) Considering the valuables and treasures in the Temple, the Government should consider handing over security of the Temple to a team of Police or at least provide Police assistance to the Temple security staff. The Government should ensure that the opening of Kallaras (storage places) and the preparation of inventory are done by a team of responsible and honest officers either from the Government or from the authority constituted to manage the Temple in terms of the directions above so that there should not be any allegation of pilferage or manipulation. Inventory should be prepared in the presence of the petitioners in W.P. (C) No.4256/2010 or their agents towards the proof of the items taken over from their custody.”

5. The Petitioners, who are aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment, have

preferred the present Special Leave Petitions.

6. On 2nd May 2011, the said Special Leave Petitions came up for hearing

before their Lordships, Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.V. Raveendran and

Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.K. Patnaik. On that date, this Hon’ble Court was

pleased to pass the following order:-

“Issue notice. Mr. P.B. Suresh, learned counsel of M/s Temple Law Firm, accepts notice for respondent No.1 (T.P. Sundararajan).

Page 6 of 93

Interim stay of direction (i) of the impugned judgment which directs taking over of the assets and management of the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple, Thiruvananthapuram. Interim stay of directions (ii) to (iv) of the impugned judgment subject to the following interim directions:- (a) There shall be a detailed inventory of the articles/valuables/ ornaments in Kallaras described as (a) to (f) in the Second Schedule to the Plaint in O.S. No.625/2007 on the file of the Sub- Judge, Thiruvananthapuram. The inventory shall be held in the presence of the following observers:- (i) Two observers appointed by this Court namely, Justice M.N. Krishnan and Justice C.S. Rajan, retired Judges of the Kerala High Court. (ii) The first petitioner and the second petitioner. (iii) A senior officer of the State Government, namely the Secretary, Devaswom Department or his nominated representative. (iv) A senior officer nominated by the Secretary, Department of Archaeology, Ministry of Culture, Government of India who is stationed at Kerala. (v) The PIL petitioner (first respondent). Justice M.N. Krishnan shall be in charge of organising the inventory, fixing of schedules. The entire expenditure of inventory shall be met by the Petitioners. He is also authorised to seek police security at the time of such inventory. The observers shall decide upon the procedure and documentation of the inventory including videographing/ photographing the articles. (b) In regard to the articles in kallaras (c) and (d) used for regular rituals and the ornaments in kallaras (e) and (f) said to be in the custody of Periya Nambi and Thekkedom Nambi, the existing practices, procedures and rituals may be followed in regard to the opening and closing of the Kallaras and using the articles therein. As far as Kallaras (a) and (b), which is reportedly not opened for more than a century, they shall be opened only for the purpose of making inventory of the articles and then closed and sealed again. (c) The inventory shall be filed in this Court and copies of the inventory be given to all participating parties and observers. (d) The existing temple security shall be further strengthened by additional security from the local police. (e) The first petitioner and his family shall be entitled to participate in all temple festivals and rituals as hitherto before. Let a copy of this order be sent to Justice M.N. Krishnan, Justice C.S. Rajan, the Secretary, Devaswom Department, State of Kerala and the Secretary, Department of Archaeology, Government of India for due implementation. List in August, 2011 for further orders.”

Page 7 of 93

7. Then, on 8th July 2011, this Hon’ble Court directed that:-

“Opening of kallara ‘B’ is to be kept in abeyance till further orders. Kallara ‘A’ also need not be opened for the present. List on 14.7.2011 as first item.”

8. Soon thereafter, the respondent State of Kerala filed an affidavit dated

14th July 2011 and the stand of the State was recorded by this Hon’ble

Court (in its order dated 21st July 2011) as follows:-

“Ownership: All articles found in the Kallaras of Shree Padmanabha Swamy Temple (including objects of value gold ornaments, precious stones and antiques) belong to the (Temple) and neither the State Government nor the family of ex-rulers of Travancore can have any claim over them. Storage/Exhibition: The ornaments/antiques are not suitable or sufficient for creating a separate museum. All the articles being property of the temple, should remain within the confines of temple premises. It is neither practical nor advisable to remove them from the temple environs security. Security: A senior officer of the rank of Additional Director General of Police has been put in charge of the security of the temple. A control room has been made operational. A special team of police officers has been entrusted with the task of studying the security requirements. Ensuring adequate security for the temple is the primary responsibility of the government and it will do everything necessary for acquisition of the state-of-the-art security systems (which are least obtrusive and most effective) and install them shortly. The temple will be guarded round the clock. Commandos have been posted to guard the gates.”

9. The Executive Officer of the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple also filed

an affidavit dated 14th July 2011 in which the views of His Highness Sri

Marthanda Varma, the Sole Trustee, and the Executive Officer of the

Temple were expressed. Those views have also been extracted by this

Hon’ble Court in its order dated 21st July 2011:-

“Ownership:

Page 8 of 93

All articles, ornaments, valuables, precious stones, antiques without exception found in the Kallaras belong to the Presiding Deity of Shree Padmanabhaswamy Temple and neither Mr. Marthanda Varma nor his family members have any claim over them. Mr. Marthanda Varma merely administers the property/assets of the Deity and the temple as the Trustee. Storage/Exhibition: The articles found in Kallara ‘A’ can be segregated into three categories:- (i) Articles having historic/heritage/artistic value considered “priceless” can be kept in the Kallara itself and taken out periodically for being exhibited on special occasions within the temple premises for the benefit of the devotees and general public; (ii) Even articles which have only some historic/heritage/ artistic value and cannot be considered to be “priceless” shall be kept in the safe custody of Kallara; (iii) Articles having monetary value but no historic/heritage/ artistic value, could be disposed of and the proceeds used for purchasing immovable properties for the renovation and maintenance of the temple and for education including establishment of a ‘Veda Pathsala’ and a ‘Thanthirika Peedom’ for imparting training and grooming Temple priests. Inventory: Videography and photography of the articles in Kallara ‘A’ may be avoided, as the inventory has already been completed. But if it is found that the videography/photography is necessary for completing the inventory, the same may be carried out strictly under the supervision and the films/cartridges shall be deposited in a sealed cover so that unauthorized copies are not made. As the primary object of the inventory is to ascertain what is available and not disposal of sale, there is no need to have a valuation. However the services of a conservationist or expert in antiques may be availed for categorizing the articles and completing the inventory in a scientific manner. Security arrangements: While installing security systems, in particular CCTVs and other electronic devices, care should be taken in regard to two aspects. First is that the customs/traditions of the temple should be respected and taken note of. Second is that worship by the devotees should not be disturbed. The Police personnel on security duty, when inside the temple, should be unobtrusive and comply with the dress code of the temple.”

10. Sri Rama Varma, the Petitioner in the companion Special Leave Petition

(Civil) No. 17081-17082 of 2011, also made certain suggestions, which

have been extracted by this Hon’ble Court in its order dated 21st July

2011:-

Page 9 of 93

“(i) The articles found from the Kallaras should not be removed from the sanctum sanctorum of the temple nor should be exhibited outside the temple. A few sample items of antique/archaeological value may be exhibited in the premises of the temple complex. Alternatively they may be exhibited in the museum adjoining the temple after making appropriate arrangements for display and security. (ii) Opening Kallara-B may be avoided. If it is to be opened that should be done after conducting the traditional Deva Prashnam.”

11. In such light, this Hon’ble Court, vide order dated 21st July 2011,

directed the following:-

“...... 4. After considering the submissions made during the arguments and the suggestions in the affidavits, we find that action is required in the following areas:- a) A detailed inventory of the articles in Kallaras A and C to F with videography/photography shall have to be completed under the supervision of an Expert Committee. The videographer/photographer employed for this purpose shall have security clearance from the local Police authorities. b) The services of the Experts/Conservationists shall have to be availed so that handling the articles at the time of inventory or disturbing the environment in which they were stored in the Kallaras for centuries does not affect the articles. c) Adequate and proper arrangements will have to be made for security. This would involve not only policing the premises but also having security measures/systems as also provision of a strong room/vaults/steel lining in the Kallaras with the assistance of a security expert. 5. To achieve the aforesaid results, we hereby constitute the following Expert Committee:- (1) Dr. C.V. Ananda Bose, Director General : Co-ordinator of National Museum and Vice- Chancellor, National Museum Institute, New Delhi (2) Dr. M.B. , Head of Conservation : Member Department, National Museum Institute, New Delhi (3) Nominee of the Director, Archaeological : Member Survey of India (from its science/research wing). (4) Nominee of the Governor of Reserve : Member Bank of India who is an Expert from its security wing.

Page 10 of 93

(5) The Executive Officer of the Temple : Member

6. The said Expert Committee is entrusted with the following responsibilities:- (a) To organize the inventory by videography/photography of the articles in Kallaras A, C to F and supervise such inventory and arrange for proper storage of the articles in the respective Kallaras after completion of the inventory. (b) To examine and categorise the articles into three groups: (i) Articles/ornaments having historic/heritage/artistic/ antique value. (ii) Articles that are required for regular use in the temple for religious purpose. (iii) Articles and ornaments which cannot be considered to be having any historic/heritage/artistic/antique value, but having merely a monetary value. (c) To draw up a long term and short term measure for preservation, conservation, maintenance of the articles/antiques in Kallaras of the Temple. (d) Prepare a scheme for providing security measures in the temple premises and in the Kallaras. (e) Examine whether any of the articles are worthy of exhibition for the benefit of the devotees and if so examine the feasibility of creation of a high security museum within the temple premises or the adjoining museum. (f) Examine and give an opinion whether it is necessary to open Kallara ‘B’ at this stage. 7. In view of the constitution of the said Expert Committee, there is no need to continue the large Committee of Observers. In place of the seven member Observer Committee earlier appointed, the following smaller Overseeing Committee is appointed to supervise and guide the working of the Expert Committee and to complete the inventory and continue as Observers:- (i) Justice M.N. Krishnan - Co-ordinator (ii) Mr. Marthanda Varma (or his special - Member nominee) (iii) Secretary, Devaswom Department of - Member (or his special nominee)

8. We also issue the following supplementary directions:- (a) The members of the Expert Committee shall schedule their visit in co-ordination with the Co-ordinator of the Overseeing Committee, so that the entire inventory is carried out continuously and uninterruptedly on day-to-day basis. (b) The state government and the Temple Trust shall meet the expenses of the said Expert Committee including their travel, lodging and other expenses.

Page 11 of 93

(c) Except the members of the Overseeing Committee, Expert Committee and the personnel required for the actual physical handling and security, no unauthorized person shall be permitted to be present at the time of inventory. (d) The reports in the Media about the value of the articles in the Kallaras (admittedly unverified and speculative), without seeing or examining the articles, is disturbing. We trust that the media will show more care and responsibility in such matters and avoid baseless speculations which are likely to mislead the public. (e) The members of the Overseeing Committee/the Expert Committee are expected to give their opinions and reports only to this Court and none else.”

12. The Expert Committee submitted its Interim Report I, dated 17th August

2011, to this Hon’ble Court which consequently passed the following

order on 2nd September 2011:-

“Registry is directed to make available copies of Interim Report-I dated 17.8.2011 of the Expert Committee to learned counsel for the petitioners, respondent No.7, respondents 3 to 6 in SLP (C) No.12361/2011 and to learned counsel for the State Government. List on 12.9.2011.”

13. However, on 9th September 2011, at the request of the learned counsel

for the parties, the matter stood adjourned to 16th September 2011.

14. On 16th September 2011, this Hon’ble Court was pleased to direct that

the matter be listed on 22nd September 2011 for interim orders.

15. On 22nd September 2011, this Hon’ble Court passed the following

interim orders after studying the Expert Committee’s Interim Report I:-

“We have examined the interim report dated 17.8.2011 of the Expert Committee and the additional information submitted on 12.9.2011. Having considered the said report and the submissions of the parties, the following interim directions are issued:-

SECURITY MEASURES: 1.1) The Expert Committee has identified thirteen security issues and suggested sixteen security measures to be put in place. A copy thereof has already been made available to the State Government and the Temple Administration.

Page 12 of 93

The state government has submitted that Security Technical Committee Report putting forth an Integrated Multi-Layered Security System for the Temple, for our perusal. In view of security concerns, we do not propose to extract either the security issues raised or the security measures suggested by the Expert Committee or the security measures proposed by the state government. 1.2) The state government has submitted that it has the expertise and capability to provide the necessary security measures; and it is ready and willing to provide the same at its cost. The state government has assured that it would spare no effort or cost to provide the best security cover and has stated that there is no need to indent the service of any central security force like CRPF as suggested by the Expert Committee, for strengthening the security. Having examined the Security Technical Committee Report furnished by the state government and its assurance to put in place an Integrated Multi-Layered Security System for the Temple in a time bound manner, we are satisfied that the state government would be in a position to execute the security plan. There is no need for the state government to requisition the services of any central security agency. 1.3) The state government shall take note of the sixteen security measures that have been suggested by the Expert Committee in its Interim Report dated 17.8.2011 and promptly implement the Integrated Multi-Layered Security System explained and suggested in its Security Technical Committee Report. In implementing the security system, the state government will take note of temple traditions, customs and practices, and accommodate the views of the temple administration as far as possible and feasible. WORK PLAN 2.1) The Expert Committee has suggested ‘Digital Archiving of Temple Antiques’ (for short ‘DATA’) to achieve the following: (i) Recording of detailed information after examination and assigning an Antique Identification Number/Code; (ii) to store the information in a computerized database; (iii) recording of a 3D image of the object and link it to the Data Base. The Expert Committee is permitted to implement the said ‘DATA’ procedure. 2.2) The Expert Committee has recommended appointment of Kerala State Electronic Corporation (KELTRON), a state government undertaking with technical expertise from Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC), an unit of Department of Space for implementing the work plan. Having regard to the security concerns and approval of the said agency by the state government, we accept the suggestion that the ‘DATA’ work should be executed by the said government undertaking instead of inviting tenders from private agencies. 2.3) KELTRON has estimated the cost of executing the work to be Rs.3,16,35,000/- made up of Rs.1,65,35,000/- for

Page 13 of 93

hardware, Rs.40,00,000/- for software, and Rs.1,11,00,000/- for services and miscellaneous items. The cost appears to be very high and far exceeds the figures shown in the Interim Report. The feasibility of borrowing/hiring the equipment can be considered. The software cost and servicing cost requires drastic reduction. However, KELTRON being a state government undertaking and VSSC, the technical expert being a unit of Department of Space, the Expert Committee may proceed to entrust the work to KELTRON after involving the state government in the process of negotiations relating to cost and the schedule of payment. We do not propose to approve the said price. As the state government has to bear the expenditure involved, it will take the final decision on the pricing after negotiations, in consultation with the Expert Committee. The state government shall nominate a Nodal Officer for this purpose failing which the Secretary, Devaswom Department shall be the Nodal Officer. TIME FRAME: 3. The Committee has suggested time framework of one year to complete the entire work. Efforts shall be made to shorten the time schedule without sacrificing quality of work. To ensure that the time schedule is maintained, we request the state government to take appropriate decisions and release the required funds without any delay. The Expert committee shall maintain constant supervision and follow up, to avoid delay. KALLARA B: 4. The issue relating to Kallara ‘B’ shall be considered after substantial progress is made in regard to documentation, categorization, security, preservation, conservation, maintenance and storage relating to the contents in the other Kallaras. FUNDING: 5.1) The committee has requested for sanction of an interim budget outlay of Rs.2,98,82,000/-. This will be considered by the state government and appropriate amounts shall be sanctioned and released. The Expert Committee shall ensure that the expenditure is kept to be the minimum and avoid any kind of wasteful expenditure. Having regard to the huge expenditure that is contemplated, the state government shall provide for appropriate accounting/audit assistance so that the fund utilization is economical, efficient and transparent. 5.2) The Temple Administration has expressed its inability to make any significant contribution towards the expenditure involved, having regard to its limited resources. However, having regard to its participatory status, the Temple Administration shall contribute Rs.25,00,000/- per year towards the funds required for completing the work plan and for security arrangements. The balance shall be contributed by the state government. MISCELLANEOUS:

Page 14 of 93

6.1) The Expert Committee may take all necessary steps for preservation and conservation of the contents of Kallaras. 6.2) Temple Administration shall identify a suitable space (keeping in view the security concerns and the temple traditions) for construction of a safety vault/storage space as per Reserve Bank of India norms in consultation with the Expert Committee and commence construction without delay. 6.3) To maintain confidentiality and avoid logistic problems, the Temple Administration shall make available an independent office space with proper security in the temple premises for the Overseeing Committee and the Expert Committee, for the duration of the project. 6.4) The Expert Committee has reported that the term of the office of the Coordinator Dr. Anand Bose, under the Central Government has come to an end on 20.9.2011. If his services are not extended by the central government, we request the state government to consider engaging his services as a Co-ordinator of the Expert Committee for a period of one year so that there will be continuity and co- ordination in the functioning of the Expert Committee. 6.5) The state government and the Temple Administration shall extend their full cooperation to the Overseeing Committee and the Expert Committee for execution of the DATA project and security measures. 6.6) The Expert Committee will take the approval of the Overseeing Committee before taking final decisions on matters of policy and execution. 7. List after three months for the next Interim Report of the Expert Committee and for final disposal.”2

16. The Expert Committee submitted its Interim Report II, dated 30th

December 2011, on 5th January 2012. In that report, the Expert

Committee divided the directions of this Hon’ble Court into three parts:

those relating to the responsibility of the State Government, the Temple

Administration and the Expert Committee. As far as the State

Government was concerned, this Hon’ble Court had directed it to:

(i) release adequate funds to implement the directions of this

Hon’ble Court;

2 Certain subsequent orders passed by the Registrar and the Judge-in-Chambers are not being extracted in the instant report of the Amicus Curiae.

Page 15 of 93

(ii) provide accounting/audit assistance to the Expert Committee;

(iii) negotiate and reduce the cost so that digital archiving of antiques

could be entrusted to KELTRON;

(iv) implement the security scheme for the protection of valuables in

the Kallaras; and

(v) appoint a Nodal Officer for negotiation with KELTRON.

17. The Temple Administration, on the other hand, had been directed to:

(i) release Rs.25 for the work relating to the Temple;

(ii) provide office accommodation for the Expert Committee; and ,

(iii) construct a safety vault/storage (although the Amicus Curiae is

unable to discover such a direction in the orders).

18. As far as the responsibility of the Expert Committee is concerned, this

Hon’ble Court had directed the Committee to:

(i) reduce the time frame to complete the inventory;

(ii) reduce the expenditure without sacrificing the quality.

19. The Expert Committee however recorded that:

(i) the State Government had not yet released adequate funds;

(ii) the State Government had not yet provided accounting/audit

assistance to the Expert Committee;

(iii) on the issue of negotiation and reduction of cost, while the cost

had been reduced through negotiation with KELTRON, the work

could not be entrusted for want of funds;

(iv) out of the 14 important security measures, action had been taken

in respect of two and initiated in respect of one;

Page 16 of 93

(v) a Nodal Officer for negotiation with KELTRON was being

appointed;

(vi) the Temple Administration had not yet released Rs.25 lakhs;

(vii) the Expert Committee had not yet been provided office

accommodation; and

(viii) action had not yet been taken for the construction of the safety

vault/storage.

20. As far as the directions to the Expert Committee were concerned, the

Expert Committee assured that time would be reduced at every stage of

the work but it would be subject to the releasing of funds without any

delay by the State Government. The Expert Committee further assured

that the expenditure would be kept at a minimum without

compromising on quality.

21. In the meanwhile, the State of Kerala filed an application (I.A.

No.10/2011 in SLP No.11295 of 2011) requesting that Dr. M.Velayudhan

Nair be appointed as the Coordinator of the Expert Committee and

informing this Hon’ble Court that the services of Dr. C.V. Ananda Bose

(who was named as the Coordinator in this Hon’ble Court’s order dated

21st July 2011) need not be continued upon his superannuation.

Accordingly, the State of Kerala prayed that this Hon’ble Court “approve

the nomination of the Secretary (Devaswom) as the nodal officer pursuant to the

order of this Hon’ble Court dated 22nd September 2011” and “in view of the

superannuation of Dr. Ananda Bose, appoint Dr. M.V. Nair as the Coordinator

of the Expert Committee”.

22. On 5th January 2012, this Hon’ble Court approved the nomination of the

Secretary (Devaswom) as the Nodal Officer (the said officer was

Page 17 of 93

nominated by Sri Jay Kumar, the then Additional Chief Secretary and

the present Chief Secretary, Government of Kerala). This Hon’ble Court

further directed that Dr. M. Velayudhan Nair would act as the

Coordinator of the Expert Committee, and that copies of the Expert

Committee’s Interim Report II should be provided to all the parties. This

Hon’ble Court’s order therefore read as follows:-

“By this application made by the State of Kerala, it is prayed that nomination of Secretary (Devaswoms) as the Nodal Officer may be approved. We record the statement of Ms. Liz Mathew, learned counsel for the State of Kerala that Mr. Jai Kumar, Additional Chief Secretary has been appointed as the Nodal Officer. The nomination made by the State Government is approved by this order. We are informed that Dr. Anand Bose, who was earlier appointed as Co- ordinator has also retired. Having regard to this fact, we direct that Dr. M.V. Nair shall now act as Co-ordinator of the Expert Committee. I.A. No. 10 stands disposed of accordingly.

I.A. No. 11 of 2011: Heard Mr. S. Thanuskodi, applicant in person. Application for intervention is rejected. S.L.P. (C) Nos. 11295/11, 12361/11 and 17081-17082/2011: Let copy of the Interim Report-II dated December 30, 2011 submitted by the Expert Committee be provided to all the parties. We expect the parties to take necessary action required to be taken by them as per the earlier orders of this Court without any delay. Let the Special Leave Petitions come up for consideration of the Interim Report-II on February 15, 2012 at 3.30 P.M.”

23. The Expert Committee submitted its Interim Report III under the

stewardship of Dr. M. Velayudhan Nair. The said report recorded that:-

(i) the State Government had sanctioned a sum of Rs. 2.5 crores to

KELTRON;

Page 18 of 93

(ii) the State Government had initiated steps for providing funds for

expenses towards the functioning of the Expert Committee;

(iii) the 16 points of the security scheme implementation were

reviewed and a progress report had been appended;

(iv) the Temple Administration had provided an office for the Expert

Committee at Ramanamadam and the meeting of the Overseeing

Committee and the Expert Committee took place in the said office

on 9th February 2011;

(v) the Temple Administration had opened a bank account in the

name of the Expert Committee and a sum of Rs.15 lakhs had been

transferred by the Temple in the said account;

(vi) work space had been provided inside the Temple for the effective

functioning of the Expert Committee;

(vii) as far as the Expert Committee was concerned, it had reduced the

expenses for its functioning from Rs.1.48 crores to Rs.75 lakhs per

year, without affecting the quality of its work;

(viii) the Expert Committee had decided to start the documentation

process as per the work plan approved by this Hon’ble Court;

(ix) KELTRON had started importing equipment necessary for the

inventorying work;

(x) software had been developed for documentation of the valuables;

(xi) the first successful demonstration of documentation was held off-

site on 7th February 2012, in the presence of experts, and the

second on–site demonstration was held on 9th February 2012;

Page 19 of 93

(xii) the best available technology was being used for the inventory

work and that the process would be reviewed after completing

the process for 100 objects;

(xiii) the Expert Committee would take advice from international

agencies without compromising confidentiality and without

acting in any manner inconsistent with the directions of this

Hon’ble Court;

(xiv) the Expert Committee was now fully equipped for starting the

documentation session from 10th February 2012. However, since

‘Pariharakriya’ of the Temple was scheduled to be held, the

commencement was deferred to 20th February 2012. The Expert

Committee however pointed out that though it was starting the

process of making an inventory with Vault ‘C’, from which the

valuables are taken out occasionally for rituals, unless a proper

vault as ordered by this Hon’ble Court was constructed the

progress of the inventory work would be affected. The Expert

Committee therefore sought directions for:-

a. the construction of a security vault on the norms of the

Reserve Bank of India within a period of 3 months;

b. immediate release of funds as per the revised budget from

the State Government to enable effective and proper

functioning of the Expert Committee;

c. permitting the Expert Committee to take advice from

international agencies with adequate experience in similar

ventures, without compromising confidentiality and without

violating the orders of this Hon’ble Court;

Page 20 of 93

d. opening and closing of the Kallaras on a daily basis

according to requirements for implementing the work plan.

In addition, the Interim Report also annexed a chart showing the

progress/status as far as the security scheme was concerned.

24. Thereafter, on 15th February 2012, this Hon’ble passed the following

order:-

“Let the copy of the Interim Report-III submitted by the Expert Committee be provided to all the parties. List the matters for consideration on February 23, 2012 at 3 P.M. In the meanwhile, it is directed that Principal Sub-Judge, Thiruvananthapuram shall not pass any order/or proceed with the O.S. No. 625 of 2007.”

25. It may be noted at this juncture that O.S. No.625/2007 (cited in the order

above) had been instituted by one N. Vishwambaran and one R.

Padmanabhan under Section 91 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

The suit, according to the Plaintiffs, was instituted in a representative

capacity for the devotees. It was contended that the wealth which was

contributed by the Rulers was kept safely inside the four vaults of the

Nalambalam which were described as the Plaint ‘B’ Schedule property.

26. In the plaint, it was stated that the 2nd Defendant, namely, one Col.

Sasidharan R., who was then the Executive Officer of the Sree

Padmanabha Swamy Temple, had opened the Kallaras under the

directions of His Highness Sri Marthanda Varma and taken out huge

quantities of gold and diamonds without recording it and had then

taken the valuables to unknown destinations. The said incident was

alleged to have taken place on 2nd August 2007. It was also alleged that

cameras were taken inside the Temple premises and that photographs

had been taken inside the sanctum sanctorum.

Page 21 of 93

27. The Plaintiffs further contended that the Temple is a treasure house of

art and architecture, which is of great historical importance, and thus

needed to be preserved.

28. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs sought the following reliefs in the

aforementioned suit:-

(i) “A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants, his agents, henchmen or any other person claiming to have any right in the affairs or the Temple from opening the six Kallara (cellars) inside the Nalambalam which is Plaint B schedule herein or take any articles from the cellar in any form, in any manner or for any purpose or act in any manner detrimental to the interest of the Deity or the devotees. (ii) To pass a decree of mandatory injunction removing all articles brought inside the temple that is Plaint A schedule by the 2nd defendant against the customs, practice and traditions at his own expenses or in the alternative permit the plaintiffs to remove the same at their own expenses and to recover the same from the defendants and their assets. (iii) To allow costs of the suit to be realized from the defendants and their assets both movable and immovable. (iv) To grant such other or such further reliefs as this Honourable Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

29. The plaint schedule properties were described in the suit as follows:-

“PLAINT SCHEDULE PROPERTIES PLAINT “A” SCHEDULE Sree Padmanabhaswamy Temple situated inside the Fort Area with eight entrances spread over a sprawling 7.04 acres of land together with numerous buildings, temples and all other things attached thereto of Vanchiyoor Village, Trivandrum Taluk, Trivandrum District. PLAINT “B” SCHEDULE a. Kallara No.1 on the southern side of the Nalambalam inside the chandanamandapam. b. Kallara No.2 on the South west corner outside the chandanamandapam inside the Nalambalam. c. Kallara No.3 on the north western side inside the Nalambalam. d. Kallara No.4 on the northern side inside the Nalambalam. e. Kallara No.5 inside the Sreekovil on the northern side next to the idol of Vishwaksenar.

Page 22 of 93

f. Kallara No.6 inside the Sreekovil on the south eastern corner towards the exit gate to Thekkedom Narasimhamoorthy Temple.”

30. On 18th December 2007, certain interlocutory applications which were

filed on behalf of the Plaintiffs and Defendants came up for hearing

before the Trial Court. I.A. No.4704/2007 was filed by the two Plaintiffs

seeking an interim prohibitory injunction. I.A. No.5510/2007 was filed

by the Plaintiffs to implead the State of Kerala as the third Defendant in

the suit and I.A. No.5195/2007 was filed by Defendants 1 and 2 seeking

to question the very maintainability of the suit. While deciding these

applications, the Trial Court acknowledged the history of the Temple in

the following words:-

“……It is in the heart of the city of Trivandrum and the name of the city is derived from the holy serpent Ananda and the city is known as the “Puram of Ananda”. There cannot be a history of Trivandrum and the without mentioning the history of this great Temple.”

31. As far as the issue of maintainability was concerned, the Trial Court

came to the conclusion that there was no Ruler of erstwhile Travancore

since the demise of His Highness Sri Chithira Thirunal Varma

and thus the Court had jurisdiction to try the suit. The Trial Court also

concluded that the State of Kerala ought to be impleaded as the third

Defendant.

32. On the important issue of grant of prohibitory injunction, the Court

noted that it would act as parens patriae and that:

“…..during the interregnum defendants 1 and 2 should not be allowed to misappropriate the Temple treasures inside the Temple which attracted even Tipu Sultan once upon a time. All the six Kallaras require great protection and safeguard. At present, murajapam is going on inside the Temple and for that purpose two Advocate Commissioners are appointed as per the request of defendants 1 and 2 in I.A. No.6056/2007. Murajapam will conclude on 14th January 2008 as per the schedule. The Advocate Commissioners, are devotees of the Temple. If it is necessary to open any of the Kallaras in the meanwhile, it can be done under the

Page 23 of 93

supervision of this Court and with the help of the Commissioners Shri B.R. Shyam and Shri V. Suresh Kumar. Defendants shall not suffer any irreparable injury on account of the order of interim prohibitory injunction. Interim prohibitory injunction shall continue until the matter is finally heard along with the submissions of the State of Kerala…..”

33. Interestingly, even though notice had been issued by this Hon’ble Court,

along with the grant of interim directions on 2nd May 2011 (and on

subsequent dates), the parties continued to move applications before the

Trial Court. Thus, for example, on account of the subsistence of the

order passed by the Trial Court, the Executive Officer moved an

application to take out vessels from the Temple vaults at the instance of

the Advocate Commissioners for the conduct of the rectification

ceremony (Pariharakriya) held between 5th February 2012 and 16th

February 2012. The Trial Court recorded that the Commissioners had

been appointed on 22nd December 2001 and were permitted to take out

the vessels for the conduct of regular festivals, religious practices and

rituals of the Temple. However, the Trial Court’s order also observes

that an interim report had been filed by the Advocate Commissioners on

15th January 2012 stating that the vessels which were taken out and

handed over to the Executive Officer had not been returned until the

time of filing of the report. A second report was then filed by the

Advocate Commissioners stating that they had given a notice to the

Executive Officer to return the vessels mentioned earlier. It was further

reported that on 4th February 2012, the Advocate Commissioners were

present to receive back the vessels, but the vessels were not returned and

neither the Executive Officer nor his representative was present. The

person representing the staff of the Temple allegedly stated to the

Advocate Commissioners that the vessels would not be returned until

the conclusion of the ‘Pariharakriya’. The Trial Court therefore noted that

Page 24 of 93

the Executive Officer had postponed the return of the vessels and had

kept them for the purpose of the ‘Pariharakriya’ even though such use

had not been authorized by the Court. The Trial Court therefore

observed in its order dated 9th February 2012 that:-

“The Commissioners have stated in the open Court that one vessel would weigh 600 gms which shows the value of the article. There are around 200 vessels taken which are now in the custody of the Executive Officer and its value cannot be imagined. Such articles are kept at the hands of the Executive Officer without the authority of the Court. This Court cannot appreciate such conduct. That apart, the Supreme Court in its order dated 2nd May 2011, made certain interim directions.”

34. The Trial Court then referred to interim direction (b) in this Hon’ble

Court’s order dated 2nd May 2011 and reproduced the same as follows:-

“In regard to the articles in Kallaras C and D used for regular rituals and the ornaments etc. in Kallaras E and F said to be in the custody of Periya Nambi and Thekkadom Nambi, the existing practices, procedures and rituals may be followed in regard to the opening and closing of the Kallaras and using of the articles therein. As far as Kallaras A and B which is reportedly not opened for more than a century, they shall be opened only for the purpose of making inventory of the articles and then closed and sealed again.”

35. The Trial Court however said that the vessels which were kept in

Kallaras ‘C’ and ‘D’ were used for regular poojas and that this Hon’ble

Court had granted permission to take the vessels out four times for the

conduct of regular rituals and religious practices. However, it was

observed that:

“Now vessels are sought for in this petition for the conduct of rectification ceremony or pariharakriya which is not a regular religious practice or regular ritual of the temple…..”[Emphasis supplied]

36. The Trial Court therefore concluded that:-

“…..Now since the matter has been seized by the Honourable Supreme Court the Executive Officer apparently has to obtain the permission of the Honourable Supreme Court in regard to the permission regarding the conduct of Pariharakriya. It is not obtained. It is not obtained from this court also. Thus it is held that the vessels cannot be taken out for the following two reasons:-

Page 25 of 93

(i) As the vessels are not returned as per the order 22.12.2011 of this court, this court cannot grant permission. (ii) Since Pariharakriya is not a regular ritual or religious practice of the temple, this court cannot grant permission for taking out the vessels for the said purpose for which permission has to be obtained from Honourable Supreme Court or this court……

It is also directed that the Executive Officer shall return back the vessels taken out as per order dated 22.12.2011 forthwith to the Commissioners and the Commissioners shall take back the vessels after checking same and keep it in the earmarked vaults. The Commissioners shall file report regarding the same and the Executive Officer shall also file an affidavit on 13.2.2012 after complying with the direction of this court…..”

37. As a result, the Trial Court dismissed the application which had been

filed by the Executive Officer to take out the vessels for the purpose of

‘Pariharakriya’.

38. It may be noted that in O.S. No.625/2007, the State has filed a written

statement on the basis that the Ruler of the erstwhile State of Travancore

acts as Trustee and the properties and funds of the Temple are managed

by the Ruler. The State has also said that the Executive Officer is

appointed under the control and supervision of the Ruler of erstwhile

Travancore. The State has further submitted that:

“….in the case of Shree Padmanabha Swamy Temple, there seems no valid reason for Government to interfere in the administration of the Temple. The administration of the Temple has not broken down nor is there any other allegation of a major nature which forces Government to interfere in the administrative affairs of the Temple…...”

This Hon’ble Court finally stayed the proceedings in O.S. No.625/2007

vide order dated 15th February 2012.

39. As far as the Special Leave Petitions are concerned, on 23rd February

2012, this Hon’ble Court was pleased to pass the following directions:-

“On hearing Mr. K.K. Venugopal, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Dhruv Mehta, learned senior counsel for respondent Nos. 4 to 7 and Ms. Liz Mathew, learned counsel for the State of Kerala, we pass the following order in continuation of the earlier orders/directions:-

Page 26 of 93

1) The removal of articles necessary for the conduct of pujas, rituals and other ceremonies from Kalaras ‘C’ and ‘D’ shall be done with the help of two Advocate Commissioners, S/Sh B.R. Shyam and V. Suresh Kumar under the supervision of the Expert Committee. The Advocate Commissioners shall fully co-operate with the Expert Committee and abide by the directions that may be given by the Expert Committee from time to time. 2) In case, the Expert Committee finds that the Advocate Commissioners are not co-operating with it or not following with its directions, it will be open to the Expert Committee to replace the Advocate Commissioners by two respectable devotees. 3) For the purpose of inventorisation of Kallaras ‘C’ and ‘D’, it is clarified that the help of the Advocate Commissioners is not required and the Expert Committee shall be free to open the Kallara ‘C’ and ‘D’ for the purpose of inventorisation as and when necessary. 4) The Expert Committee shall submit the estimate for construction of the security wall on the norms of the Reserve Bank of India as well as the estimate involved in seeking advice from the international agency for which permission has been sought from this Court. These estimates shall be submitted within four weeks from today. 5) The State of Kerala is directed to release the fund as per the revised budget for the proper functioning of the Expert Committee immediately and in no case later than two weeks from today. List the matter on March 29, 2012 at 3.30 p.m. for further directions.”

40. In the meanwhile, the Expert Committee submitted its Interim Report IV

on 26th March 2012. The Interim Report recorded that:-

(i) 859 artefacts from Kallaras ‘C’, ‘E’ and ‘F’ had been inventorised;

(ii) Inventorisation of upto 90% of the artefacts in Kallara ‘C’ had

been completed;

(iii) More than 60% of the inventorisation work with respect to

Kallaras ‘E’ and ‘F’ had been completed;

(iv) Inventory work was stopped from 24th March to 15th April 2012 in

view of the ‘Paikuni’ festival;

Page 27 of 93

(v) On the question of constructing a security vault, the Expert

Committee set out various points which had been brought to

notice in the representation given by the Temple Administration.

One of the points which was made was that any new vault must

be constructed according to the vastu tradition. In this respect, the

Expert Committee had approached Sri Kannippayyoor Krishnan

Nambuthirippadu, a renowned vastu expert and Dean of the

Vastuvidya Gurukulam (an autonomous institution of the

Government of Kerala), who had given a report suggesting the

strengthening of the existing Kallaras and stating that if a new one

had to be constructed, it should be built in the space between

Kallara ‘B’ and Kallara ‘C’. As a result, the Expert Committee was

of the opinion that construction of a new vault should be deferred

till Kallara ‘B’ is opened and priority should be given to

strengthening Kallara ‘C’ which, at present, houses the artefacts

for occasional use by the Temple. The report also noted that a

suitable architect competent to undertake the work of

strengthening the vaults had been identified by the State Bank of

Travancore.

41. The Expert Committee’s Interim Report IV also noted that it was

forming three Expert Groups:-

(i) Expert Group I to study the historical aspects of the Temple;

(ii) Expert Group II to carry out technical studies;

(iii) Expert Group III to study the utilization of valuables and the

construction of a museum.

42. The Expert Committee thereafter sought orders on the following

questions: whether it could open Kallara ‘B’; whether it could defer the

Page 28 of 93

construction of a new vault till such opening; and whether the articles

could be stored in the existing Kallaras without compromising the

security and preservation? The Expert Committee also sought a

direction for the strengthening of Kallara ‘C’ which would cost

approximately Rs.37 lakhs.

43. On 18th April 2012, this Hon’ble Court passed the following order:-

“By Interim Report-IV dated March 26, 2012, the Expert Committee has sought the following directions:- (i) whether the Committee can open Kallara ‘B’; (ii) whether the Committee can defer the construction of a new vault till Kallara ‘B’ is opened and to decide whether the articles can be stored in the existing kallaras, without compromising on security and preservation and (iii) direction on expenditure for strengthening Kallara C, costing approximately Rs. thirty seven lakhs. 2. In the order dated July 21, 2011 inter alia, this Court directed the Expert Committee to examine and give the opinion as to whether it is necessary to open Kallara ‘B’ at this stage. 3. In its Interim Report-IV, the Committee has not given any opinion after examining all aspects of the matter as directed in the order dated July 21, 2011 as to whether it is necessary to open Kallara ‘B’ at this stage. 4. In our view, the inventorisation of the articles of Kallara ‘A’ has to be completed first. On completion thereof, the Expert Committee shall examine the matter as per the order dated July 21, 2011 and submit its opinion about opening of kallara ‘B’. 5. In its Progress Report-I, the Co-ordinator of the Expert Committee has submitted summary of work so far completed (i) in a sealed cover comprising Article I in electronic format and (ii) Article II in hard copy format. He has also sent the password and report on existing vaults in sealed covers in Article III and Article IV respectively. 6. The Expert Committee shall ensure that summary of work in electronic format and hard copy is kept in a sealed cover and no further copies are prepared. 7. The Court Masters shall put the above Articles I to IV and also copies prepared for the second set in a sealed cover and hand over the same to Registrar (J-III) for keeping in his lock and key. 8. In the Progress Report-I, the Co-ordinator has indicated that the inventorisation of kallara ‘A’ will take place after April 23, 2012. He has also stated that it is not practical to keep the valuables from Kallara ‘A’ back into the same space without compromising the conservation and safety standards.

Page 29 of 93

9. In our opinion, the Expert Committee has to ensure that after inventorisation, all the articles/valuables from kallara ‘A’ are kept back in the same space and with the help of the experts it must be ensured that there is no compromise to the conservation and safety standards of these articles/valuables. 10. As regards the strengthening of kallara ‘C’, in the Interim Report-IV, it is stated that it would cost approximately Rs.35/37 lakhs. In our view, Kallara ‘C’ needs to be strengthened and 2/3rd of its cost must be borne by the State of Kerala and 1/3rd by the Temple Management. 11. The State of Kerala and the Temple Management are directed to contribute their share towards expenditure for strengthening of kallara ‘C’ to the Expert Committee within one month from today. 12. List the matter on August 8, 2012 at 3.30 p.m. for further directions.”

44. Then, on 8th August 2012, this Hon’ble Court was pleased to pass the

following order:-

“I.A. No. 14 of 2012 in S.L.P. (C) No. 11295 of 2011: Respondent No. 1 – T.P. Sundara Rajan is reported to have died on July 17, 2011. The Writ Petition which was filed before the Kerala High Court was in the nature of Public Interest Litigation. Accordingly, it is not necessary to bring on record the legal heirs of deceased respondent No. 1 – T.P. Sundara Rajan. The name of deceased respondent No.1 – T.P. Sundara Rajan is struck off from the array of parties. Amended cause-title shall be filed within two weeks from today. S.L.P. (C) No. 11295 of 2011: Let the copy of the Interim Report No. V submitted by the Expert Committee be supplied to the parties concerned. Writ Petition (C) No. 518 of 2011: Although, we do not intend to issue notice in this Writ Petition at this stage but the petitioner, if so advised, may supply copy of the Writ Petition to all the parties in the Special Leave Petition. List this group of matters on August 23, 2012 at 3.30 p.m.”

45. In the meanwhile, the Expert Committee submitted Interim Report V.

The said report, dated 6th August 2012, states as follows:-

(i) “All the 1469 groups of objects kept in Kallara C and 617 objects kept in Kallara ‘D’ have been completely documented.

Page 30 of 93

(ii) Inventorisation of 41 items in Kallaras E & F has been completed. The remaining objects are of daily use for rituals and the Nambis (temple priests) were not prepare[d] [to] spare any of them for inventorisation. This is reported to the Hon’ble Supreme Court (iii) The inventorisation of Kallara A started on 5.7.2012 and the work is in full swing. A total of 631 objects out of Kallara ‘A’ have been documented so far.”

46. The Expert Committee also noted that it had earlier recommended the

strengthening of vault ‘C’ so that the valuables in Kallara ‘A’ could be

transferred to Kallara ‘C’ after inventorisation. However, the Interim

Report stated as follows:

“According to their scientific investigation, Vault A, holding most of the valuable items is the safest of all opened vaults in the Temple and priority has to be given for strengthening it. The Joint meeting of the Expert and Overseeing committees convened on 12.7.2012 decided to accept the recommendation of the Expert group and decided, subject to the approval of the Hon. Supreme Court, to strengthen Kallara 'A' giving priority. The Committee also accepted the decision of the expert group to select Godrej as the implementing agency considering the competency and reputation of the firm in this field and also taking into account the intricate problems involved in strengthening without affecting heritage structure of the vault. It was also decided to invite the topmost specialist from Godrej for an “on the spot” study of the problem in the presence of the Expert Group. M/s. Godrej responded promptly by sending the topmost person from their Design Wing who inspected the vaults on 23.7.2012 in the presence of Chief Engineer PWD and Shri. T. Saboo of ISRO and submitted a provisional proposal which has been examined by Shri Vikas Verma, nominated member of RBI to the Expert Committee who has consolidated facts and submitted the report. The report is appended as ANNEXURE-l The scientific strength of the vaults A & C by ISRO and the report is enclosed as ANNEXURE-1(A)

Hon. Supreme Court may grant approval to the proposal of the Expert Group to strengthen the vault A in the place of Vault C and also, to engage M/s Godrej &Boyce Ltd., for this purpose. Also, permission may be given to the Committee to shift the valuables in Vault A, kept locked and sealed in different steel boxes, to Vault C when the strengthening work starts in Vault A and store them in Vault C till the completion of the work of strengthening, without any compromise on security of the articles.”

Page 31 of 93

47. On the issue of storage of data from inventorisation and retrieval of the

same, the Expert Committee decided to store the inventory data with

ISRO in the interests of secrecy and as per disaster management norms.

On 14th June 2012, it was also decided that a vault in the State Bank of

India / State Bank of Travancore should be hired to store the hard copies

of the backup of the data and to authorize Sri Adithya Varma, nominee

of His Highness Sri Marthanda Varma, and Sri C. Karthikeyan Nair, the

present Administrative Officer of the Expert Committee, to jointly

operate the same.

48. It must be noted that earlier, on 9th April 2012, the Expert Committee

had decided that the aforesaid data must be stored in three different

locations, one at ISRO and the remaining in locations to be identified. It

appears, however, that His Highness Sri Marthanda Varma was of the

opinion that this may tantamount to carrying the data outside the

Temple premises which may not be in conformity with the directions

issued by this Hon’ble Court and Sri Marthanda Varma was therefore of

the opinion that the same needed an express permission from this

Hon’ble Court. In view of this concern, as a temporary measure, a

Godrej storewell was purchased and kept in the server room to store the

hard discs with the backup of the data contained in the

server/computers. Undoubtedly, such a backup of the data is necessary.

49. The Expert Committee’s Report further points out that there are fair

chances of losing the electronic data from the server on account of

disasters. Therefore, the Expert Committee states that it should be

allowed to store the data in soft copy and hard copy format in an

environment which will survive all forms of disasters, as well as the

adverse effects of climatic variation.

Page 32 of 93

50. The Expert Committee has also pointed out that the Government of

Kerala has given directions preventing the Committee from utilizing the

services of Sri V.K. Harikumar, Executive Officer, and 8 others in the

inventorisation process on the ground of adverse reports on their

antecedents. As a result, it appears that the Expert Committee has not

been able to issue security passes (for entry to the work area) to these

persons for want of necessary certification from the Home Department,

Government of Kerala. The Expert Committee, however, records that:-

“….the committee is forced to use the services of some of these persons including Shri Harikumar, who, being the Executive Officer of the Temple, is a Member of the Expert Committee besides being the custodian of one set of the keys of the vaults….”

51. It is further recorded as follows:-

“Though the committee does not have any complaints against Shri Harikumar and others mentioned in the report of the Home Ministry it considers it as a security lapse allowing persons to enter the workspace without valid (sic) passes…..”

52. Although the Expert Committee records that His Highness Sri

Marthanda Varma did not respond to requests for making an alternate

arrangement in place of the present Executive Officer, the Amicus Curiae,

in consultation with His Highness Sri Marthanda Varma and Justice M.

N. Krishnan, has proposed certain alternative arrangements (set out later

in this Report) to deal with various issues.

However, if this Hon’ble Court is satisfied with the material at

hand that the antecedents of any of the said individuals is less than

perfect, it may be safer to appoint new persons instead, without making

any comment on the credentials and integrity of those being replaced.

Page 33 of 93

53. Moreover, the Expert Committee has also pointed out that a report was

published in a Malayalam Daily called ‘Mangalam’, on 28th May 2012,

containing allegations that:

“Mr. Harikumar, Executive Officer of the temple and a member of the Expert committee by virtue of his position reported to the royal family a deliberate attempt by some members of the Committee to leak out the data.”

It may be noted that the said report has also been followed by various

writings on the internet that seek to defame the Expert Committee. It

may be said in fairness to Sri Harikumar, that he has denied any such

interaction.

54. In Part VI of Interim Report V, the Expert Committee has noted that: “While examining the articles for the purpose of inventorisation, tags attached to the articles, revealing the identification numbers given to the items during earlier stock taking (For instance, in M.E 1104 corresponding to Year 1930-31) have been found.”

55. The Expert Committee therefore notes that the registers/records

prepared on those occasions would be of use in the present

inventorisation process as they would help in authentication as well as

speeding up the work.

56. It is however submitted that the Expert Committee has sought directions

from this Hon’ble Court that the records and registers of earlier stock

taking be provided even though there does not appear to have been any

request by the Committee to the Temple Administration for the same,

nor does there appear to be any refusal on the part of the Temple

Administration to part with such records of earlier inventories.

57. The Interim Report also lays out the following recommendations for

enhancing the security:

Page 34 of 93

(i) All the pending security issues, such as procurement of multi–

zone DFMDs, explosive detectors, x-ray baggage scanners, fire

fighting equipment, etc. may be done on priority. Progress on this

aspect is not satisfactory.

(ii) The training of Temple security staff on usage of portable fire

extinguishers and management of disasters like stampedes and

bomb explosions should be carried out on priority basis by

trained police staff.

(iii) The backup data of CCTV systems and inventory data of the

Temple valuables are at present being kept on site, which is

against the principles of disaster management. They should be

secured at off–site locations immediately.

(iv) Proper fire-fighting arrangements may be made for the room

housing the server which stores data relating to the inventory of

the Temple valuables.

(v) Installation of bollards may be done on priority as they are

required for imposing effective restrictions on vehicular

movements near and around the Temple premises.

(vi) All unauthorized shops, political party offices and eateries in the

proximity of the Temple premises may be removed by

appropriate authorities on priority.

(vii) Electricity poles located close to the perimeter wall may either be

relocated to a safe distance or should be covered by barbed wire

for eliminating the possibility of intrusion.

(viii) Drainage channel openings may be blocked/fortified by installing

steel grills at the openings.

Page 35 of 93

58. In Part VIII of the Interim Report, the Expert Committee has stated that

it commenced the inventory work on 20th February 2012 and that it has

completed inventorisation of all objects in vaults ‘C’ and ‘D’, as well as

that of the permitted objects in vaults ‘E’ and ‘F’. However, the

inventorisation of items in vault ‘A’ is taking a longer time on account of

the work involved in analyzing the quality of the gems, their purity, and

their physical properties such as colour and transparency. The Interim

Report then goes on to state that the Expert Committee is using

internationally accepted techniques and that inventorisation is being

carried out using software of International Council of Museums (ICOM)

standards. The Expert Committee hopes to complete the entire

inventorisation work by 20th August 2013.

59. In light of the above, the Expert Committee has sought directions from

this Hon’ble Court on the following points:-

(i) Whether strengthening of vault ‘A’ can be given preference to

strengthening of vault ‘C’?

(ii) If so, whether the Expert Committee can engage M/s Godrej on

terms negotiated by the Chief Engineer, PWD, Government of

Kerala?

(iii) Whether the revised cost for the aforesaid strengthening work can

be shared between Government of Kerala and the Temple in the

ratio of 2:1 as fixed by this Hon’ble Court?

(iv) Whether the valuables kept in sealed boxes can be temporarily

shifted to vault ‘C’ while executing the work, considering the

security and safety of the valuables?

Page 36 of 93

(v) In view of the inadequacy of secrecy of the data stored in servers

located inside the Temple, and also considering the principles of

disaster management, whether the Expert Committee can store the

data with ISRO without compromising confidentiality and

security?

(vi) Considering the difficulties and uncertainty in preservation of data

in electronic form, whether the Expert Committee can preserve the

data as a hard copy in suitable fireproof lockers outside the Temple

while ensuring confidentiality and security?

(vii) Whether Sri Harikumar (the present Executive Officer) and the 8

others mentioned earlier can continue to be associated with the

inventorisation process despite the directions of the Home

Ministry, Government of Kerala?

(viii) Whether this Hon’ble Court can reiterate its stand to the media

against publishing misleading information?

(ix) Whether this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the

Temple/Palace to provide the Expert Committee with records and

registers of earlier stock taking?

(x) Whether this Hon’ble Court may give suitable direction to the

Temple/Government to implement the security recommendations

within a period of 3 months?

(xi) Whether the time for completing the inventorisation process can be

extended up to August 2013?

60. Thereafter, by an order dated 23rd August 2012, this Hon’ble Court

appointed an Amicus Curiae in the matter. The order states as follows:-

“S.L.P. (Civil) No. 11295/2011:

Page 37 of 93

Having regard to the controversy involved in the matter and the reports being submitted by the Expert Committee on Sree Padmanabhaswamy Temple from time to time, we are of the opinion that an amicus needs to be appointed to assist the Court. In the course of discussion, the name of Mr. Gopal Subramaniam, Senior Counsel, cropped up. All the parties are agreeable that Mr. Gopal Subramaniam, Senior Counsel, may be appointed as amicus curiae. We, accordingly, request Mr. Gopal Subramaniam, learned senior counsel, to act as amicus curiae in the matter. Let a copy of the special leave petition alongwith affidavits and documents, interim reports submitted by the Expert Committee from time to time and the proceedings and order sheets in the matter be given to Mr. Gopal Subramaniam, learned senior counsel, amicus curiae, by the Registry within two weeks. List the matter on September 19, 2012 at 3 p.m. S.L.P. (Civil) No. 12361/2011; S.L.P. (Civil) Nos. 17081-17082/2011 and Writ Petition (Civil) No. 518/2011: List these matters along with S.L.P. (Civil) No.11295/2011.”

61. The Amicus Curiae mentioned the matter before this Hon’ble Court in

order to enable him and the junior counsel assisting him to visit

Thiruvananthapuram for an on-the-spot assessment of the activities at

the Temple, including the activities outlined in the reports of the Expert

Committee. Thus, on 17th September 2012, this Hon’ble Court recorded

as follows:-

“At the request of Mr. Gopal Subramanium, learned Amicus Curiae and not objected to by M/s. B.V. Deepak, Vipin Nair and Liz Mathew, learned counsel for the parties, list this group of matters on October 9, 2012 at 3 P.M.”

62. Before proceeding to the next part of this report, it would not be out of

place to mention that the Executive Officer had filed an affidavit dated

23rd August 2012 asserting that the control and supervision of the gold,

ornaments, jewels and all other items kept in Kallaras ‘A’ to ‘F’ are, as

per the statute, with his office and that he is the custodian of the keys to

Page 38 of 93

the locks of the Kallaras within the Temple and also of the boxes

containing invaluable articles and artefacts inside these Kallaras.

63. The Executive Officer further states that he is the only member of the

Expert Committee resident in Thiruvananthapuram and present in the

Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple on a daily basis to discharge his

duties. According to him, out of the remaining three members of the

Expert Committee, one is a representative of the Archaeological Survey

of India and is a resident of Trichur and the other two members are

residents of Delhi and Jaipur. He further states that the first member

mentioned earlier was present only for 3-4 days during the

inventorisation process between February 2012 and August 2012, while

the other two members were present only for 25-30 days. The Executive

Officer claims that only he could monitor the implementation of the

orders of this Hon’ble Court for preparing the inventory of the items

found in the Kallaras.

64. In the said affidavit, the Executive Officer complains that the

Coordinator of the Expert Committee wrote to the Home Department

(Government of Kerala) for police clearance for him as well as seven of

his assistants who were employees of the Temple. The Executive Officer

has therefore objected to the adverse report of the Home Department

and stated that it was not appropriate for the Coordinator to seek any

such clearance with regard to any member of the Expert Committee

without the leave of this Hon’ble Court.

65. The Executive Officer has further submitted that the statement contained

in Part IV of the Interim Report V of the Expert Committee, that the

Committee had approached His Highness Sri Marthanda Varma on the

issue of security clearance, but that the Committee did not get any

Page 39 of 93

response from him, is not accurate. He further states that the only

request which was made by the Administrative Officer of the Expert

Committee was as follows:-

“In this connection, I am directed to request Your Highness to take suitable steps to ensure smooth conduct of the job of the Expert Committee in the manner envisaged by the Supreme Court.”

66. The Executive Officer further states that he has not been permitted to

exercise his functions by virtue of the fact that he was not given a pass to

enter the work area. He further states, that on most of the days, no

member of the Expert Committee is present throughout the day during

the inventorisation process.

67. According to the Executive Officer, he has held additional charge as

Director of Municipal Administration, Thiruvananthapuram from 2000

and he was substantively appointed to that post in July 2001 until he

retired in October 2001. The Executive Officer further asserts that the

post of Director, Municipal Administration is an IAS cadre post and his

appointment was cleared by the Cabinet and he was appointed with the

concurrence of the UPSC and the Central Government. However, the

Amicus Curiae has not received any confirmation from the State

Government on this issue.

68. In paragraph 12 of his affidavit, the Executive Officer also states that he

would deliver the 18 registers in question regarding past inventories to

the Expert Committee for its use after preparing photocopies of those

registers. It is however stated by the Executive Officer that Justice M.N.

Krishnan had prepared an inventory of the contents of vaults ‘A’, ‘C’,

‘D’, ‘E’ and ‘F’ and that Justice M. N. Krishnan should therefore be

requested to hand over the entire inventory to the Expert Committee.

Page 40 of 93

The Amicus Curiae has learnt that Justice M. N. Krishnan has kept the

inventory in a bank locker.

69. I.A. No.17 of 2012 in SLP (C) 11295 of 2011 has been filed for the purpose

of enabling the Additional Affidavit dated 23rd August 2012 to be taken

on record.

70. The Executive Officer has also moved an Interlocutory Application,

namely, I.A. No.16 of 2012 in SLP (C) No. 11295 of 2011 praying for the

following orders:-

(i) that a copy of the inquiry report of the Home Department,

Government of Kerala, which has been submitted to this Hon’ble

Court in a sealed cover, be supplied to the applicant;

(ii) that the present Coordinator of the Overseeing Committee

produce the entire record of the inventory of vaults ‘A’, ‘C’, ‘D’,

‘E’ and ‘F’;

(iii) that the Petitioner be permitted to take photocopies of the

registers adverted to in the Interim Report V prior to their

production before the Expert Committee.

71. An interlocutory application was also filed on 1st October 2012 by the

third Respondent. The applicant, N. Vishwanbaran, one of the party

respondents in Writ Petition (C) No.4256/2010 before the Kerala High

Court. The applicant-third respondent was also one of the plaintiffs in

the earlier mentioned O.S. No.625/2007 instituted before the Principal

Subordinate Judge, Thiruvananthapuram.

In the said application, the third respondent seeks the removal of

Sri V.K. Harikumar as a member of the Expert Committee. The said

application refers to his previous conduct in flouting the orders of the

Page 41 of 93

Court below, coupled with the fact that the Home Department,

Government of Kerala, had serious reservations about his continuation

given his previous antecedents.

72. In a Counter Affidavit filed by one R. Chandran Kutty (dated 24th

September 2011) it is disclosed that a circular was issued by Sri

Marthanda Varma on 2nd August 2007 stating that the cellars of the

Temple wherein gold and silver articles were stored would be opened

for taking photographs to prepare an album.

In the said affidavit, it is also pointed out that there should be a

transparent process of identification and valuation of the antique

articles, including an inventory.

II. HISTORY AND TRADITIONS OF THE SREE PADMANABHA SWAMY TEMPLE

1. Before providing his recommendations and suggestions, the Amicus

Curiae believes that a brief narration of the history of the Temple is

necessary to appreciate the recommendations and suggestions.

2. Stella Kramrisch in her famous book ‘ Temple’ has beautifully

described a temple as follows:

“It is a place for the meeting and marriage of Heaven and Earth where the whole world is present in terms of measure, and is accessible to man… …The Temple is a concrete shape (Murti) of the essence; as such it is the residence and vesture of God. The masonry is the sheath (kosha) and body. The Temple is the monument of manifestation. The devotee who comes to the Temple, to look at it, does so as a ‘seer’, not as a spectator.”

3. In Hindu philosophy, Advaita Vedanta declares ‘ekameva dwitiya brahman’

which means that only one Supreme Divinity exists. However, there is

Page 42 of 93

also a process for being able to realize the ultimate Upanishadic Truth.

Saguna Upasana is considered an essential pathway to establish

communion with the Divine. The sages in India have been adept in

teaching devotees both Saguna Upasana, i.e., where God is an object of

worship and the devotee enters into a lifelong relationship with his ‘ishta

devata’ which leads to Nirguna Samadhi.

4. Hindu philosophy is embodied in – (a) the ; (b) the ,

i.e., the interpretation of the Vedas; (c) the (d) the Bhagavath

Gita; and (e) the Tantras which are contained in different Puranas. The

rituals and prayogas are contained in the Smritis. It is important to note

that Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple is mentioned in six Puranas. In

the Purana, the following shloka finds a place:-

“यनादरािमितू ख्यात ं भमू ेघुयमर् पदं मम उतरे तू समद्रयु मलयय त ु दिक्षणे ||”

(Meaning: I reside in the land which lies south of the Malaya mountain

and north of the ocean, which is famed by the name Syanandoora.)

5. A later shloka in the aforesaid scripture says:

“तत्राचयमर् प्रवयािम यनादरू े यशिवनी सौवण र्ं यते पद्म ं मयाने तू िदवाकरे ”

(There has been a belief about the existence of a ‘golden lotus’ in the

Padma Teertham, passed on through oral tradition.)

6. Similarly, the Purana also refers to the sanctity of ‘Anantasayana

Puram’. In the , Lord is referred to as

Page 43 of 93

“Syanandoora Purusha” and His domain as “Syanandoorapura”. There is a

legend of the Temple connecting Sree Padmanabha Swamy with a sage

called Divakara:-

“दिक्षणहतेन पिजतिशवू ……. िदवाकरमिनसु ेिवत:”

7. In the Temple, Sree Maha Vishnu lies on a coiled serpent in a reclining

pose, in a state of nidra, and his right hand is stretched downwards

for worshipping Lord . While from his nabhi (navel), a lotus stem

sprouts upwards and in the lotus, Lord Brahma, the Creator, is situated.

The meaning of such an idol and its significance will be explained later.

8. It may also be noted that Anantasayanam is described in the various parts

of Brahma Purana and in the book called Anantasayana Mahatmyam, the

following phrase appears, “madhyamadhwari paschyantam nabhi

pankajamuthamam”. The presence of Lord Moorthy is also

mentioned in the following lines:-

“अनंताशयानो अनंतापद्मानाभो न्रकु े सरी क्षेत्रिमन भाती देवेशवद भीठं प्रदायित ”

This shloka describes the names of the Teerthams which have been

related to this Temple for long. This also indicates the name of the

famous Padmanabha Teertham.

9. The Lord has two Devis, namely, the Bhoomi Devi and Lakshmi Devi

and reference to the same is also made:-

“सवलोकायर् ं देवं ीभिमयू ं िनषेिवत ं ”

Page 44 of 93

10. In Padma Purana, Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple has been

considered to be one of the principal places of Vaishnava pilgrimage.

There is a reference to Anantasayanam along with the references to

Mathura, Thirumala, Sreerangam. It is as follows:

“स कदािचदगा राजा यनतशयन ं िवज यत्रासौ जगतां नाथो योगिनद्रमपाितःु ”

(Meaning: Once that king went to Anantasayanam where the Lord of the

world was in Yoga Nidra)

11. In the Skanda Purana, again the term ‘Padmanabha’ is mentioned in the

following manner:-

“मथराु पद्मनाभाच काशी िववेवरालयः”

12. In Srimad Bhagavatham, it has been stated that Balarama visited

Syanandoorapuri during the time of the Kurukshetra war, where he had

a vision of Lord Vishnu and is believed to have taken bath in

panchapsarassu which is presently known as Padma Theertham (the

Temple tank). In Purana, there is again a reference to the Sree

Padmanabha Swamy Temple.

13. Moreover, there were great Shaivite and Vaishnavite saints in Tamil

Nadu and the Vaishnavite saints were called Alvars. The composition of

many of these sages in fact dates back to the 1st and 2nd century A.D.

during the reign of the Chera Kings. In Pathittu Pathu, a Tamil treatise,

there is a reference to Lord Padmanabha in the following stanza:-

“வண்டு ஊது ெபாலிதார் திரு ஞாயமற் அகலாது கண்ேபாருதிrகி

Page 45 of 93

கமழ குட்ட்ருழயலங்கன் ெசல்வம்”

(Meaning: Resplendent God who is adorned with flower garlands,

surrounded by buzzing bees and who places Maha Lakshmi on the

bosom and who holds the weapon of victory which is the Chakram.)

14. There are similar references to be found even in Chilappathikaram

authored by Ilanko Adigal whose composition presumably dates

between the 4th and the 7th century A.D. In Divya Prabandham,

Kulasekhara Alvar expressly refers to the Sree Padmanabha Swamy

Temple.

15. In the 9th century A.D., composed various verses which are

called “Thiruvaymozhi”. Nammalvar would sing in ecstasy on the

various facets of Maha Vishnu (alike ). In the

Divya Prabandham of the Alvar sages, Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple

is identified as one of the 108 divya-deshams or important places of

pilgrimage for Vaishnava devotees. In one of the verses it is said:-

“ெகடுமிட ராயெவல்லாம் ேகசவா ெவண்ண நாளும் ெகாடுவிைன ெசய்யும்கூற்றின் தமர்களும் குன்கிள்ளஈ விடுமுைட யரவில்பள்ளி விரும்பினான் கரும்பலற்றும் தடமுைட வயளந்த புறநகர்ப் புகுதுமின்ேற”

(Meaning: The name of Keshava is sufficient to drive away all troubles.

Even death will not approach a devotee who chants His name. Now

sacred city abounding with lush fields and lakes known as Anandapura,

Sree Narayana Bhagawan reigns with joy as Ananthashayi.)

16. It may also be pointed out that various other pieces of literature, such as

Thiruvananthai Thalavilasam composed in 1847 A.D., refer to the Sree

Padmanabha Swamy Temple. In Thiruvananthai Thalavilasam it is stated

Page 46 of 93

that ‘[t]hose devotees will have no rebirth who worship Lord Padmanabha

Swamy and his sacred feet.’

17. There is another reference to the Sree Padmanabhaswamy Temple in the

works of Sureshwara Acharya, who was the first disciple of Sree Adi

Sankara. Sureshwara Acharya founded the ‘Naduvil Madhom’ at

Trichur, from where the Pushpanjali Swamiyar of the Temple hails. In the

book Samkshepa Shaareerakam the following is said:-

“अिवरालापदापड़िक्त पद्मनाभय पयाु चरनाकमालाढूिलग्राहीणी भारतीयम धनातारामपघतमु ेयसः ोत्रसंघात सरसिरिदवाु सघो मट्र ”

(Meaning: Let this Bharati (the book Samkshepa Shaareerakam) having

continuity of verse (like the ceaseless flow of the Ganga), possessed of

the pollen of the holy lotus feet of the Sree Padmanabha, the most

auspicious one, wipe off in a trice the dense darkness of ignorance from

the listeners, like the divine Ganga (originating from Sree Padmanabha’s

feet) which washes away the sins of those who immerse themselves in

her.)

18. It may also be noted that Vilvamangalathu Divakara Acharya who was

instrumental in re-discovering the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple in

the 9th century and who was a disciple of Sureshwara Acharya of

Naduvil Madhom in Trichur also produced a work which mentions the

great Lord Padmanabha in the following words:-

“अनथपुर नाथशच शषयायीे िह शोभते”

Page 47 of 93

(Meaning: The Lord of Anantapura presents Himself in all effulgence as

Seshasayee or the One who rests on the Serpent).

19. There are other texts which refer to the Sree Padmanabha Swamy

Temple. It is also interesting to note that many great sages have visited

Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple, including Sri Ramanujacharya (the

propounder of Vishishtha Advaitha), Madhvaacharya, Guru Nanak Dev

and Swami Vivekananda. In addition, Sree Kavirajdas in his biography

of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu records that the great saint visited the Temple

in 1510 A.D. and describes this great Temple as one among the six

Narayana Sthalas where Sree Narayana is ever present in Bharat.

20. It may be pointed out that in the Hindu tradition, every Deity is

assigned various attributes. Sri Maha Vishnu is considered to comprise

all the three elements of existence, knowledge and bliss (sat, chit,

ananda). In Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple, the entirety of cosmic

drama, from creation to change and the deep oceans of the unconscious

universe, is beautifully depicted.

21. It may be noted that the Deity of Sree Padmanabha Swamy appears to be

placed on a Sree . The Sree Chakra is a symbol of the highest form

of divinity signifying cosmic unity. The serpent is actually symbolic.

According to certain commentators of Kundalini, tantra-shastra is the

dormant energy which lies within human beings, which when

awakened leads to self-realization. The three coils of the serpent reflect

the ida, pingla and sushumna of Kundalini and when the Kundalini is

aroused, there is a realization of Maha Vishnu as ‘sahasradala padmasta’.

Lord Vishnu is also uniquely connected to both Brahma and Shiva

as well as to Lalitha Parameshwari in the form of Sree Chakra because she

is called ‘Padmanabha Sahodari’. The name ‘Padmanabha’ consists of 5

Page 48 of 93

matrikas, which are again identified as ‘pa’ for purusha, ‘da’ for jihuva,

‘ma’ for sparsha, ‘na’ for gandham and ‘bha’ for gandharva. These

letters have deeper esoteric meanings.

The state of yoga nidra is where the Deity is supremely conscious

in the highest state of union with the Maha-tattva, His creation, His

devotees and it also signifies the delicate balance which Vishnu as the

preserver maintains to protect the universe and ensures its safety.

22. Very importantly, the name of Sree Padmanabha Swamy is mentioned

thrice in the Vishnu Sahasranama. The dhayana shloka of Maha Vishnu is

as follows:-

“शाताकारं भजगशयनु ं पद्मनाभं सुरेश ं िववाधारं गगनसशं मेघवण र् शभाङ्गमु ् । लमीकातं कमलनयनं योिगिभयार्नगयम ् वदे िवणं ु भवभयहरं सवलोकर् ै कनाथम ् ॥”

The first line means:-

We meditate ("vande") upon the master ("naatham") of the universe

("sarva-lokaika"), Lord Vishnu, who is ever peaceful ("shaanta-

aakaaram"), who lies on the great serpent-bed ("bhujaga-shayanam"),

from whose navel ("nabhi") springs the lotus ("padma") of the creative

power, who is the controller ("eesham") of the Devas ("sura").

The second line means:-

... whose form ("aakaaram") is the entire universe ("vishwa"), and who is

the foundation ("aadhaaram") for the universe, and who is all pervading

("sadrusham") as the sky ("gagana"), of the hue ("varnam") of the cloud

("megha"), of fascinating beauty ("shuba-angam")

The third line means:-

...the Lord ("kaantam") of Laksmi, the lotus ("kamala") eyed

("nayanam"); He who dwells in the hearts ("bhir") of the yogis and who

Page 49 of 93

can be approached ("gamyam") and perceived through meditation

("dhyaana"),

The fourth line means:-

We pray to ("vande") to Lord Vishnu, he who is the destroyer ("haram")

of the fear ("bhaya") of samsara ("bhava") and the Lord of all ("sarva")

the worlds ("loka").

23. The Vishnu Sahasranama3 is a list of 1000 holy names of Lord Vishnu and

is found in Shanthi parva in the . Another version exists in

the Padma Purana and yet another in the Matsya Purana. In the

Mahabharata, Yudhishtra asks Bheeshma:-

“कीमेकं दैवत ं लोके िकम वायेकम पारायनम थवु ंथ कं कमाचार्दा प्रनयु रु माँनवा शभमु को धम र् सव र् धमार्णं भवथ परमो मथाह िकं जपन मयथु े जथरु जम संसार बधनातः”

(Meaning: In this universe, who is the one deva of all (i.e., at whose

command all things function or who is God of all)? Who is the one

greatest refuge for all? Who is the one divinity by praising whom and

by worshipping whom, a man attains good? Which according to you is

the highest form of (capable of bestowing salvation and

prosperity in man)? What is that, by uttering or reciting which any

living being can attain freedom from cycle of births and deaths?

Bheeshma answers that by the chanting of Vishnu Sahasranama, which

contains the thousand names of Lord Vishnu, there would be freedom

from sorrow. )

24. There are numerous commentaries on the Vishnu Sahasranama, including

a commentary by Adi Sankaracharya in the 8th century and Parashara

3 The word ‘sahasra’ means thousand.

Page 50 of 93

Bhattar in the 12th century. There was a third commentary by

Madhvaacharya.

25. Even in the Vedic chants, Vishnu is described as an aspect of Shiva. In

the Vishnu Sahasranama, Vishnu is also referred to as Shiva, Shambu,

Eshaana and Rudra. It may be noted that while Adi Shankaracharya’s

commentary emphasizes the Advaitic nature of the non-dual Brahman in

Vishnu; the commentary of Parashara Bhattar concentrates on the

attributes of the Divine with whom the devotee forms a personal

relationship. In the Vaarahi tantra, it is said that, the shlokas which can

be recited freely in the Kaliyuga are the Bhagawad Gita, Vishnu

Sahasranama and Chandika Saptashati (Durga Saptashati). The first shloka

in the Vishnu Sahasranama is as follows:-

(Meaning: One who is the Cosmic Universe itself and who is all

pervading and one who is the Lord of Past, Future and the Present. He is

the one who is the creator, nurturer, the movable and the immovable.

He is the very soul of Universe.)

26. The first place where the name ‘Padmanabha’ occurs in the Vishnu

Sahasranama is as follows:-

This shloka means Padmanabha is one from whose navel springs the

lotus (Padma) which is the seat of the four faced Creator, Lord Brahma.

Page 51 of 93

Lotus represents truth and its manifested powers. The creative energy

emanates from the nabhi and manifests in the form of the four faced

Brahma as also the four faced chaturmukha consists of the mind, intellect,

chith and ego (i.e., antahkarana).

In the yoga shastras, it may be noted, that every idea is supposed

to spring from the navel (i.e., from paraa) and then at the navel area each

of them comes to be perceived (pashyanti). Then the thought is in the

mind as madhyama and is expressed as vikari.

27. The second instance where the name Padmanabha is mentioned in the

Vishnu Sahasranama, is in the following shloka:-

It may be noted that the expression Padmanabha is keeping company

with sutahpaa (i.e., one who has glorious tapas) and also prajapati (i.e., the

one who is the Lord of all creation).

28. The third place where the name of Padmanabha occurs in the Vishnu

Sahasranama is in the following shloka:-

It may be noted that Padmanabha here also means the psychic center

where all unmanifest thoughts spring forth into recognition as pashyanti.

The seedless state of all thoughts is paraa which is also the state in yoga

nidra. Aravindaksha means the one who has eyes which are as beautiful

as the petals of a lotus. Padma-garbha means one who is being meditated

upon in the center of the lotus of the heart of devotees (in Hindu

Page 52 of 93

tradition, the are viewed as various lotus). The Deity sustains

and nourishes all the bodies in the form of ‘anna’ and ‘prana’. The Deity

has great ‘riddhi’ meaning prosperity and power which together

constitute the potency of aishwarya’s unlimited glories. In fact, the term

‘riddha’ can mean that He has expanded himself to be the entire

universe, i.e., the entire cosmos. He is also the ancient self. In other

words, He is eternal self or He is the self before all creation and even

before the creation of time. He is also the great eyed (mahaa-aksha) and

the one who has as an insignia on His flag.

29. In this context, it may be necessary to mention that the Sree

Padmanabha Swamy Temple is an integral part of the traditions of the

Royal family of the erstwhile State of Travancore and also the people of

Kerala (including the residents of the ancient city of

Thiruvananthapuram). It is interesting to note that Ashwathi Thirunal

Gouri Lakshmi Bayi (one of the members of the Royal family), in her

book Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple published by the Bharatiya Vidya

Bhavan, interestingly refers to the Prakrit version and the final Sanskrit

version of Sree Anandapuram from Syanandoorapura. The Sree

Padmanabha Swamy Temple is connected to twenty four holy teerthams

and is also linked with certain other temples, many of which are in the

State of . It may be noted that even today, Mathilakom

records or the palm leave scrolls which recorded the ancient history of

the Temple and that of the erstwhile State of Travancore are available in

the Temple premises and in the Kerala State Archives.

30. It must also be noted that the idol of Lord Padmanabha is made using

katu sharkara yogam (a complex mixture of 8 natural ingredients) in which

12008 Salagramas were filled in. This idol made using katu sharkara

Page 53 of 93

yogam was consecrated in the year 1739 under the aegis of the erstwhile

ruler of Travancore, Veera Marthanda Varma (1706-1758). Salagrama is

not a mere stone but a stone of longstanding tradition and spiritual

potency in which it is believed that Hari or Lord Vishnu resides (hence,

yathaa salagrameh hari). Thus, Eashwara or God manifests Himself in

saguna forms in various ways – in the Salagrama as Vishnu, in the

as Shiva and in the chakra as Devi (Mother Goddess). Usually,

when 12 salagrama shilas are worshipped, it equals the potency of a maha-

kshetram or a great temple. Therefore, the sanctity of Sree Padmanabha

Swamy Temple is a thousand fold.

31. The main Deity or ‘Moola Vigraha’ is 18 feet long and the colour of ‘kattu-

sarkara-yogam’ is black. No abhishekam is performed on the main Deity

because it may alter the surface of the vigraha while prokshanam or tantric

purification is done and flowers are also offered along with vastram or

clothes which are laid on the Deity. The old flowers are dusted off by

using peacock feathers. The Shiva linga which is fashioned out of saiva

salagrama shila is found beneath the right hand of the Lord.

32. There are three doors in the shrine – the first door, from where the head

and hands of the Deity can be seen, the middle door, from where the

nabhi or navel can be seen and the third door which reveals the feet of

the Deity. In the middle portion of the shrine, three abhisheka murthies

which are made of pure gold are consecrated and they are of Sree

Padmanabha Swamy with Bhoomi Devi and Lakshmi Devi on either

side and also a smaller idol in silver which is Sree Padmanabha Swamy

in a sitting posture. These are worshipped ritualistically on a

daily basis. This includes the performance of abhishekam through proper

mudras and offering purified food or Naivedyam.

Page 54 of 93

33. It may also be pointed out that there are other Deities in the Temple such

as Sree (whose shrine in the Temple enjoys position of a

separate temple), Sree Agrashala Ganapathy, Sree Rama, ,

Sita and Sree Anjaneya, Sree Narasimha Murthy, Sree Dharmashasta,

Sree Vishvaksena as well as Sree Kshetra-paala (the guardian Deity of

the Temple). It may be noted that pooja is also offered to these Deities

and the Deity Anjaneya is anointed with unsalted pure butter daily,

while Garuda is occasionaly bathed in gingely oil. These two Deities are

found next to the flag staff or dhwaja-stambha of the Temple, facing the

main Deity. The Sree Krishna Temple which was mentioned earlier is

known as Thiruvampadi Sree Krishna Temple.

34. At this juncture, it would be appropriate to mention that the Travancore

Royal family is also called the Venadu Raja Vamsha which is the off-

shoot of Chera royal lineage and the Ayi royal dynasty, and has always

regarded Lord Padmanabha Swamy as their tutelory Deity and this is

confirmed by many historical records where Lord Padmanabha is

addressed as ‘yadavendrakuladaivatam’ or the family Deity of yadava-

kshatriyas (the present Travancore royalty); thereby confirming that Sree

Padmanabha Swamy is the ‘kuladaivta’ of the entire family. It may be

noted that devotees other than royalty have worshipped Lord

Padmanabha Swamy as their ‘ishta daivta’ or God of one’s personal

choice.

35. It was in 1731 A.D. that the first King of the erstwhile Travancore Royal

family, Sree Veera Marthanda Varma, was anointed. He was succeeded

by Rama Varma (1758-1798). Moreover, the Royal family consisted of

deeply devoted members who were dedicated to the Temple and who

believed that their lives centred around Sree Padmanabha Swamy. In

Page 55 of 93

1750 A.D., the entire State of Travancore was gifted to this Deity by a

Deed and the Rulers became servants of the Lord, calling themselves as

Padmanabhadasa. It may also be noted that many of the Maharajas were

great composers of shlokas as well as music. In fact, many of the Rulers

were protectors of the Vedas and the vedic tradition. Further, the

Temple was governed by a council of trustees called Ettara Yogam

headed by the King.

36. One of the greatest Kings of the Royal family was Sri Swathi Thirunal

Maharaja Rama Varma (1813-1846) who was a great patron of the arts,

literature, music and modern science. He was an extraordinary King

who presented an incorruptible system of governance, framed the first

code of regulations of Travancore, advanced English education,

contributed to a collection of rare manuscripts and undertook a large

number of social welfare measures. In fact, Sri Swathi Thirunal is

regarded as one of the four great vidwans of Carnatic music – they being

Muthuswamy Dikshitar, Thyagaraja, Shyamasastry and Swati Thirunal.

The Kings including Sri Swathi Thirunal donated their personal wealth

to the Temple and, as recorded by Dr. Venkata Subramanya Iyer in his

brilliant book ‘Swathi Thirunal and his music’, during his eventful life,

once when one of his courtesans presented a varnam in his honour, the

King directed that it should not be used because only Lord Padmanabha

Swamy must be lauded with music.

37. During Sri Swathi Thirunal’s time, some of the pujas were found to be

faulty. He adopted remedial measures. He instituted another

‘Abhishekam’ for the Lord and also prepared Naivedyam of ambalapuzha

pal payasam. He ensured the rendering of the Vishnu Puranam and

Syanandoorapura Varnaprabhandam on a daily basis, singing of Bhaja

Page 56 of 93

Govindam by a specially constituted group, and introduced the minting

of gold coins as a symbol of sovereignty. Sri Swathi Thirunal’s music

compositions are outstanding and the Amicus Curiae submits that the

extraordinary literature which is available in respect of the compositions

of Swathi Thirunal, Thyagaraja, Muthuswamy Dikshitar and others who

have composed music on the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple also

need to be compiled.

38. In the submission of the Amicus Curiae, this Temple is one of the most

ancient temples of Maha Vishnu and is priceless. The Amicus Curiae

however noticed that urgent measures are required for the protection,

preservation as well as the proper and effective management of the

Temple. Thus, it may be added that the spirit underlying the judgment

of the Kerala High Court as well as the various interim orders passed by

this Hon’ble Court is to preserve, protect and manage the Temple along

with inventorying all the treasures which are contained in the Temple.

39. The Amicus Curiae noted that the various Kallaras or vaults are an

integral part of the Temple structure itself. In order to show the same,

the Amicus Curiae is annexing a copy of a plan which indicates where

Sree Padmanabha Swamy in the Sreekovil (sanctum) is residing and there

is a mandapam outside and by the side of Narasimha Murthy is Kallara ‘A’

adjoined by Kallara ‘B’. While Kallaras ‘C’ and ‘D’ are on the other side

of the Sreekovil. Kallaras ‘E’ and ‘F’ are close to the sanctum. The said

map/plan is annexed to this report and marked as Annexure B.

40. The treasures which are contained in these Kallaras are the continued

offerings of the Royal family including the offerings of other devotees. It

may also be noted that the priceless jewels are intended for alankara of

the Lord, gold ornaments, gold utensils and many priceless treasures are

Page 57 of 93

also to be found in these Kallaras, including priceless gems and coins.

Thus, there can hardly be any doubt that all the treasures of the Temple

belong to the Temple Deity, i.e., to Sree Padmanabha Swamy and

nobody can claim otherwise (in fact, in the temples of South India, it is

customary for people to offer various ornaments of gold and silver in

temples which are then kept separately in those temples). No person

must be allowed to take the riches of the Temple outside for any

extraneous purpose. The Amicus Curiae is of the opinion that considering

the stand of the State of Kerala as reflected in its written statement filed

in O.S. No.625 of 2007 before the Civil Court in Thiruvananthapuram

and the interaction which the Amicus Curiae had with the Chief Minister,

it is clear that the State would not do anything by which any of the

treasures of the Temple are utilized for any extraneous purpose or for

any purpose unconnected with the Deity/Temple.

41. Besides, under Hindu law as well as according to the Hindu tradition,

the Deity is supposed to have chaitanya and prana. In other words, it is a

live entity capable of owning and possessing property. It is clear that the

‘Agamic’ code for this Temple is contained in the ‘kriya saara eshaana-

shiva-gurudeva padhdhati’. There are only ten temples in the world which

are under this padhdhati and the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple is one

of them.

42. The Tantris are supposed to be initiated in this tradition and have to be

initiated in the moola of the Temple and should perform poojas

strictly in accordance with the traditions of the Temple. The Amicus

Curiae also met the chief Tantri, i.e., Tharananalloor Parameshwaran

Nambuthirippadu who is a Sanskrit Professor and undoubtedly a man

of great learning. His younger brother, Tharananalloor Satish

Page 58 of 93

Nambuthirippadu, is also considered to be an outstanding scholar and

thus it is necessary that the Tantris as an institution must be recognized

and given adequate respect for the purpose of effectively conducting the

poojas and anushthanas which are required for the Lord Padmanabha

Swamy. For the purpose of conducting such pujas, it is necessary that

acharam, i.e., observances, must be properly maintained for the purpose

of preparation of prasadam. There must be proper vadhya gosha (waking

up the Lord with nadaswaram music), suprabhatam chanting, and also

vedha japa at the time of abhishekam and it is necessary that at regular

intervals, there must also be the recitation of Sree Vishnu Sahasranamam,

the rendition of Bhagavatham, the chanting of the Maha Mantra as well as

the rendition of the compositions on Lord Padmanabha Swamy which

have been composed by great composers such as Sri Swathi Thirunal.

43. The Lord is also alankarapriya and it is necessary that the Deity must be

given the best possible alankaram for the purpose of offering traditional

worship and it must be ensured that the various ornaments which

belong to the Lord are used for the purpose of adorning the Deity. It is

clear from the discussions that the Amicus Curiae had with various

academics, including historians like Dr. M. Velayudhan Nair, Dr. T.P.

Sankarankutty Nair and Dr. M.G. Sashibhooshan, that the preservation

of the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple and its restoration are equally

vital and must not be viewed as being any less important than the

inventorying of the precious treasures in its vaults. It may also be

clarified that the Royal family does not want anything from the Temple’s

riches for itself. Consistent with tradition, the relationship of the Royal

family with the Temple is unique because for them Lord Padmanabha

Swamy and the Temple is their ‘life force’. While certain errors on

account of miscommunication or incorrect presentation before the

Page 59 of 93

members of the Royal family may have led to certain problems, in the

light of the interim stay of directions granted by this Hon’ble Court, it is

necessary that the Royal family is associated with the administration of

the Temple in order to ensure that the Temple is restored at the earliest.

In fact, His Highness Sri Marthanda Varma of the erstwhile State of

Travancore visits the Temple daily even at the grand old age of 90.

44. Thus, it is clear to the Amicus Curiae that various positive steps need to

be taken to protect and preserve the Temple. It is also relevant to note

that many residents continue to live in Thiruvananthapuram because of

their devotion to Lord Padmanabha Swamy and they have an emotional

relationship with the Deity. The Amicus Curiae met many people living

near the Temple and it was clear to him that the choice of living in

Thiruvananthapuram is substantiated by their proximity to the Temple

and the convenience to visit Sree Padmanabha Swamy’s shrine as many

times as possible.

45. The Royal family is also held in high repute especially by the members

of the general public and the State Government. In order to give effect

to the interim directions of this Hon’ble Court, His Highness Sri

Marthanda Varma appointed Sri Adithya Varma as his representative.

The Amicus Curiae had detailed interactions with Sri Adithya Varma and

it is clear that he is conscious of the traditions of the Royal family and

that of the Temple. He also happens to be the son of Princess Ashwathi

Thirunal Gouri Lakshmi Bayi who is an embodiment of knowledge

about the history of the Temple and for whom the Temple is her life’s

mainstay. In addition, it must be said that Sri Marthanda Varma has

written poetry on Lord Padmanabha Swamy and he is also a Sanskrit

scholar. He spoke to the Amicus Curiae in Sanskrit and the Amicus Curiae

Page 60 of 93

was pleasantly surprised to read his translation of the Sree Vishnu

Sahasranama which shows that the translation is based upon a

simultaneous understanding of both Adi Shankaracharya’s and

Parashara Bhattar’s bhashaya on the Vishnu Sahasranama.

The Amicus Curiae has also come to know that Sri Marthanda

Varma has recently completed a translation of the Sreemad Bhagawad Gita

which is to be published soon. It may be added that another member of

the Royal family, Sri Rama Varma, is trained in Carnatic music and is

also familiar with the kritis of Sri Swathi Thirunal. He is also one of the

direct descendants of Sri Swathi Thirunal. In addition, Sri Rama Varma,

one of the Petitioners, is also anxious about the Temple.

46. As far as the pooja tradition or the ‘padhadhatis’ (kriya saara) of the temple

is concerned, the same is followed by the chief Tantri, and in case of

doubt he can refer to the grantham (the ancient treatise kept in the

Tharananallore household). Before performing important Temple

ceremonies like kalasham for the Deities, Thirumudi kalasham (investing

spiritual powers in the seniormost member of the Royal family before he

takes charge as the chief custodian of the Temple) and Tantrams during

the two festivals (Alpashi and Painguni), he should take the consent or

anujna from the Pushpanjali Swamiyaar4.

47. While ritualistic worship is being undertaken at the Sree Padmanabha

Swamy Temple, the Amicus Curiae is of the opinion that considering the

size of the idol, its grandeur, the resources which are available, the

history of the Temple, and the magnificent presence of the Divinity, all

efforts must be made to increase the alankaram, upacharam and pooja

4 The Amicus Curiae had darshan of the Pushpanjali Swamiyar and the Swamiji was willing to offer all possible assistance and suggestions in the event the Tantri approached him.

Page 61 of 93

subject to the Tantris examining what further poojas can be performed

for the Deity.

It may be noted that Tharananalloor Parameshwaram

Nambuthirippadu described the Lord as ‘alankarapriya’ and readily

agreed with the suggestion of the Amicus Curiae that all precious

ornaments, including gold chains which are 18 feet long should be used

for the purpose of alankara of the Deity. Thus, the Amicus Curiae is of the

opinion that without departing from any of the padhadhatis which are

special to the , the Tantris can devise such additional upachara as is

permissible for enhanced worship at the Temple including the rendition

of Veda , i.e., purushasukta, sreesukta and bhagyasukta, the

rendition of suprabhatam, vadyagosham in the morning, rendition of

Vishnu Sahasranamam throughout the day and also the rendition of the

musical works and kirtanas in praise of Lord Padmanabha Swamy.

48. Contrary to a mistaken belief that there exists a division between

Shaivism and , the Hindu tradition allows a seeker to

choose his own pathway for self-actualisation and realization. A seeker

can seek it through yoga, i.e., union with a divine or can seek it through

bhakti or immersion with the divine and through dhyana or meditation

upon the transcendental self. The sadhaka can also undertake such

activities without any desire so that the activities liberate him from

bondage. It may be noted that in the Hindu tradition, while Advaita

philosophy believes in the non-dual nature of the supreme nature of

Brahman, in order to reach that stage, it is necessary to have saguna

upasana, i.e., the worship of a Deity for the purpose of prayers,

communication and for a continued human existence. It may be noted

that in a temple, Agamas form the basis of establishing the ritualistic

Page 62 of 93

worship, because the vedic sacrifices could no longer take place and

therefore according to the Agamic shastras, temples were established.

49. Maha Vishnu is known in all parts of India ranging from Badrinath as

Badrinarayana, right upto Thiruvananthapuram as Padmanabha. He is

also Jagannatha in Puri and is Achyuta in Dwaraka. In Mathura, He is

Bankebehari and in Natha-dwara, He is Sreenatha. Thus, the Vaishnavite

tradition has very strong cultural basis in India. It may be added that in

temples of South India, there is a fusion which takes place between the

Shaivite and the Vaishnavite traditions. In other words, Lord

Ganapathy, Lord Dandayudapani, Lord Narasimha and various other

Deities are seen in a temple which also belongs to Lord Vishnu or Lord

Narasimha. In certain places, Lord Narasimha is even seated on a Sree

Chakra. It is believed that in the Mannargudi Temple of

Rajagopalaswamy, the Rajagopalaswamy is actually standing on the Sree

Yantra, and therefore, He is referred to as Sree Vidya Rajagopalaswamy.

In view of the fact that Lord Padmanabha Swamy is lying on the serpent

which in turn appears to be on a Sree Yantra, the Tantris need to examine

whether a ‘pratinidhi’ (or representative) of the Sree Yantra needs also to

be placed for external worship in front of the utsava murti. This is a

matter which has to be decided by the Tantris according to the tradition

after following suitable rituals. Clearly, the presence of the Sree Chakra is

evident from the ceiling of the Temple under which Anjaneya is standing

and also there being a framed painting of the Sree Chakra on the back

wall of the Thiruvampadi Sree Krishna Temple.

There is a fusion of both Shaivite and Vaishnavite beliefs in the

Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple because Shiva is also seen along with

Vishnu, and the reclining Deity has ‘vilva’ leaves in his hand which

Page 63 of 93

signify his relationship with Lord Shiva. A temple where Brahma,

Vishnu, Shiva as well as the doyen of all creation which is Tripurasundari

in the form of a Sree Chakra are all combined must not be underestimated

and its precious heritage should not be ignored. Consequently, in order

to reinforce the pooja paddathi and to ensure that alankara,vadhya gosha,

veda japa as well as rendition of music and kirtana are undertaken for

such a powerful Deity, it is necessary that certain directions may be

given by this Hon’ble Court in this regard.

III. RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE AMICUS CURIAE

1. The Amicus Curiae noticed the careful manner in which the

archaeologists, the gemologists and those who were being overseen by

Dr. M. Velayudhan Nair were touching the jewellery, examining it,

photographing it and storing data in a computer. The entire process

showed immaculate and dedicated effort on the part of the team which

works with the most modern equipment. This shows that a highly

methodical, internationally acceptable form of inventorying work is

being undertaken for the precious artefacts. Each one of the members of

the team working under Dr. M. Velayudhan Nair is therefore entitled to

high praise. (In fact, the Amicus Curiae was surprised to note that every

one of them was a devotee and that they all work standing for 6-8 hours

a day without a whisper from any one of them to distract either the

divine presence in the Temple or those connected with the daily poojas

and rituals of the Temple.)

2. Dr. M. Velayudhan Nair, Professor and Head, Department of

Conservation, National Museum Institute, National Museum, Janpath,

New Delhi, has himself rendered sterling assistance to the Amicus Curiae.

Page 64 of 93

Dr. M. Velayudhan Nair is a scholar, humble and unassuming and has

brought to bear his best possible resources in inventorying the important

treasures and offerings made in the Temple.

3. The Amicus Curiae also had the opportunity to visit Kallaras ‘A’,’C’, ‘D’,

‘E’ and ‘F’ in the Temple. The Kallaras are a part of the Temple and

since the ornaments have been kept inside the Kallaras, the Amicus

Curiae is of the considered opinion that none of these ornaments or

treasures should be taken outside the Temple. For the purpose of

ensuring that these ornaments and offerings are put to proper and

correct use, they can be divided into three categories –

(a) All such ornaments which can be used for alankara and pooja,

including utensils, deepams as well as other pathrams. (In

accordance with the Tantris’ directions, they can be regularly

used).

(b) Those jewels and artefacts which are damaged and need to be

repaired or which need to be polished or restored, can be

separately identified and restoration work can be undertaken

under the supervision of an Expert Restoration and Conservation

Committee.

(c) Non-essential objects which may be of interest to the devotees

who come to the Temple can be identified and, if necessary, can be

placed in the Temple in a way so that the devotees are able to see

those items. It may be added that it is not the tradition of the

temples in South India that the personal riches of the Lord or the

Deity be put on public display. It is only when the Deity has to be

dressed and adorned that they are used. This, however, does not

mean that there should not be safe keeping of the jewellery or

Page 65 of 93

proper accounting and transparency in the matter of maintaining

the riches of the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple.

4. Moreover, in order to do justice to the outstanding inventory work being

performed by Dr. M.V. Nair’s team, as also the unique history and

heritage of the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple, the Amicus Curiae

humbly puts forth the following recommendations and suggestions:-

A. Submission of future interim reports

5. The Amicus Curiae suggests that, in future, all the reports of the

Overseeing/Expert Committee may be signed by the Coordinator of the

Overseeing Committee, even though the reports are prepared as a result

of joint deliberations between the Expert Committee and the Overseeing

Committee. It should be ensured that copies of the report are made

available to all the members of the two Committees and that they have

expressed their consent to the contents of the recommendations therein.

B. Strengthening of vaults

6. As mentioned earlier in this report, the Expert Committee has submitted

that vault A (which holds most of the valuable items) is the safest of all

the opened vaults in the Temple, and priority needs to be given for

strengthening that vault. The Expert Committee has accepted the

decision of an Expert Group to select M/s Godrej as the implementing

agency for vault strengthening considering the competency and

reputation of that firm in this field. The Amicus Curiae also met Sri T.

Saboo of ISRO and it is evident that vault A needs to be strengthened in

an appropriate manner. In fact, the Amicus Curiae is of the opinion that

all the vaults, except vault B (there are certain considerations which may

have to be addressed before vault B is opened), need to be strengthened

and efforts may be made by the Expert Committee to strengthen all the

Page 66 of 93

vaults. However, the Expert Committee can begin by strengthening

vault A and can also shift the valuables in vault A to vault C during the

strengthening process and thereafter restore them to vault A. After the

strengthening of vault A is complete, vault C can be strengthened and

efforts can simultaneously be made to strengthen vaults D, E and F.

However, since vaults E and F contain ornaments for daily use, the

strengthening process should be undertaken in consultation with the

Nambis. The same process of consultation may also have to be followed

in the case of strengthening vault D because some of the ornaments

stored in that vault are used for the purposes of pooja.

7. In respect of certain items in vaults D, E, and F the Amicus Curiae

believes that while the Tantris are justified that the pathram, i.e., the

utensils as well as the ornaments which are being used for the purpose

of worship should not be touched by others for inventorying, the

inventorisation of such items should perhaps be done by the Tantris

themselves. It is submitted that Dr. M. Velayudhan Nair as well as Sri

Adithya Varma, along with others, may discuss this issue with the

Tantris and give them suitable training for the purpose of undertaking

the inventory work for a limited number of items.

C. Storage of inventory data

8. In so far as the storage of data from inventorisation and retrieval of the

same is concerned, the suggestion of the Expert Committee that a vault

must be hired in the State Bank of India or State Bank of Travancore to

store the hard disc of the backup and that Sri Adithya Varma, nominee

of His Highness Sri Marthanda Varma and Sri C. Karthikeyan Nair, the

present Administrative Officer of the Expert Committee, should be

Page 67 of 93

authorized to jointly operate the same, appears to be correct. It is

therefore, submitted that the said resolution may be approved.

9. However, in order to ensure that one additional hard disc is available for

backup, the Amicus Curiae suggests that the same may be kept in the safe

custody of the Director, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore. At the

same time, the concern of His Highness Sri Marthanda Varma that

nothing should go out of the Temple lest the same would receive undue

publicity, can be suitably addressed by making sure that both these hard

discs are kept in lockers – one in State Bank of India and the other in the

Indian Institute of Science.

10. As far as storing the hard copy is concerned, the same may be kept in a

Godrej storewell, in a room to be identified within the Temple premises

which can then be guarded by the Kerala Police. The lock of the

storewell may be sealed and the key can be kept in the custody of Justice

M. N. Krishnan, the Coordinator of the Overseeing Committee.

11. The Amicus Curiae submits that the levels of confidentiality being

maintained by the inventorying team are exemplary and there is no

reason to doubt that any information is being made available to anyone

outside. The present standards should be maintained until the

completion of the task.

D. Adverse reports by the Home Department of the Government of Kerala

12. So far as the report of the Home Department, Government of Kerala is

concerned, it is suggested that the eight persons regarding whom there

are adverse observations should not be permitted to enter the work area

though they may continue to discharge their duties elsewhere in the

Temple premises. As far as Sri Harikumar, the present Executive Officer

Page 68 of 93

of the Temple, is concerned certain suggestions have been made in the

following paragraphs.

13. Sri Harikumar was appointed as an Executive Officer by His Highness

Sri Marthanda Varma. The Executive Officer appears to have previous

background of administrative work in the Government of Kerala. While

it is clear that the Expert Committee never intended to offend Sri

Harikumar by requiring a security pass in his name, the State

Government appears to have reported negatively about his antecedents.

Sri Harikumar is of course justified in asserting that his reputation or

character should not be besmirched because of such an enquiry, but it is

clear that the Expert Committee did not instruct, advise or partake in

any negative role to besmirch Sri Harikumar’s reputation or character.

As submitted earlier, the Expert Committee only wanted a formal

clearance from the State Government from the standpoint of security,

which was consistent with the orders passed by this Hon’ble Court on

21st July 2011.

14. It may be stated in fairness to Sri Harikumar that he came across as a

calm and quiet person. However, the following paragraphs in the

affidavit filed by Sri Harikumar could have been better worded in the

Amicus Curiae’s opinion:-

“12. The temple had produced all the registers in its possession, many of them being incomplete before the Hon'ble High Court, which is mentioned in the Annexure P9 to the SLP Paper Book (Vol.I). We would deliver the entirety of the 18 registers to the Expert Committee, for its use, after preparing photocopies of the entirety of the register.

13. In this respect, it may be mentioned that Justice M.N Krishnan, had prepared an entire inventory of Vaults A, C, D, E and F. It is therefore, submitted that Justice M.N Krishnan may be directed to deliver the entire inventory, so prepared, to the Expert Committee.”

Page 69 of 93

15. The Amicus Curiae submits that the 18 registers, which are referred to in

paragraph 12 of the aforementioned affidavit, should be handed over to

Justice M. N. Krishnan forthwith. The Executive Officer may be

permitted to make photocopies of the said 18 registers under the

supervision of Justice M. N. Krishnan. Justice M. N. Krishnan may

thereafter be requested to keep the originals in a bank locker for

safekeeping, with one set of the photocopies being provided to the

Executive Committee.

16. The Amicus Curiae further submits that if there are any other previous

records of stock taking (apart from the 18 registers referred to by Sri

Harikumar), the same should also be compiled and be made available to

the Expert Committee.

E. Restraint on the media

17. There have been reports in the newspapers about the conduct of the

Expert Committee, the Royal family of erstwhile Travancore and the

officers of the State Government. The attempts made to tarnish the

image of the Expert Committee are not warranted. The Expert

Committee has been diligently and efficiently functioning and

performing the task assigned to it by this Hon’ble Court. The Members

and the Coordinator of the Committee have been carefully chosen by

this Hon’ble Court and no one should be permitted to belittle the work

done by the Committee. However, considering the facts pleaded by Sri

Harikumar, one member of the Overseeing or Expert Committees, apart

from Sri Harikumar, should be constantly present during the

inventorying work.

18. The Amicus Curiae therefore recommends that the media should be

directed to exercise restraint and no report should be published which

Page 70 of 93

may cause misunderstanding between the parties to the litigation or

amongst the members of the public. The Amicus Curiae has held

meetings with the parties to the litigation and all agree that the interests

of the Temple and the Deity are paramount.

F. Suggested steps for effective Temple Administration

19. The Amicus Curiae is of the view that the day-to-day management of the

Temple needs some dynamic interface which would:

(i) Ensure effective communication;

(ii) Ensure greater convenience to the devotees;

(iii) Ensure that padhdhati is being strictly followed;

(iv) Obviate any lack of understanding; and

(v) Overcome any misrepresentation to the members of the Royal

family about the work being undertaken inside the Temple.

20. In order to do so, and without commenting on Sri Harikumar’s

candidature, this Hon’ble Court may consider appointing a Chief

Executive Officer. Sri Adithya Varma, the representative of His

Highness Sri Marthanda Varma in the Overseeing Committee, is most

suited for this role because he visits the Temple daily, besides having an

intimate connection with the Temple. The Chief Executive Officer will

act in consultation with, and on the advice of, the Tantris and His

Highness Sri Marthanda Varma.

21. It is also important to secure the services of dynamic youngsters who are

familiar with the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple, who are devotees

and who also have impeccable modern technical qualifications to

undertake the task of assisting in the management of the Temple as part

of their service and devotion to Lord Padmanabha Swamy. After having

Page 71 of 93

made detailed enquiries, the Amicus Curiae recommends the name of Sri

Gautham Padmanabhan as the (joint) Executive Officer, along with Sri

Harikumar who is currently the sole Executive Officer. Sri Gautham

Padmanabhan is the son of Dr. Sashibhooshan, an eminent historian

from Kerala. Sri Gautham Padmanabhan holds an MBA degree and also

happens to be intimately connected with the publications of the Royal

family. The Amicus Curiae recommends such an additional Executive

Officer – under the overall authority of the Chief Executive Officer –

considering the complexity of the work at hand which demands the

services of more than one individual to effectively manage the Temple.

22. The Amicus Curiae also suggests the inclusion of Sri C. Karthikeyan Nair,

who is presently the Administrative Officer of the Expert Committee, as

Member-Secretary of the Expert Committee so that he may have a more

proactive and effective role in the functioning of the Committee. This

would be particularly beneficial to the Expert Committee since Sri C.

Karthikeyan Nair is a resident of Thiruvananthapuram and can

therefore be available more regularly to discharge the duties of the

Expert Committee. Moreover, since Sri C. Karthikeyan Nair has been a

former revenue service officer, he may also supervise the auditing of the

accounts of the Temple (kindly see topic ‘K’ below).

G. Implementation of security measures

23. The Amicus Curiae places on record his appreciation for the security

which is now being provided by the State Police. There are plain clothes

men who are dressed in dhoti according to Temple traditions, yet

armed, to protect the Temple.

Page 72 of 93

However, some of the devotees have suggested that the security

personnel need sensitization and training for such a specialized

assignment.

24. Sri Putta Vimaladitya, DCP (L & O), also requested that some

arrangements be made for the permanent accommodation of the police

personnel. This too should be looked into by the Temple

Administration.

25. As far as access control is concerned, it is recommended that the security

member, Sri Vikas Verma, along with the Director General of Police,

study all the areas surrounding the Temple before suggesting whether

any adjoining areas need to be sanitized.

26. As far as enhancement of security is concerned, the State Government

should be asked to implement the various recommendations contained

in Annexure 6 of the Expert Committee’s Interim Report V within a

period of 5 months from the acceptance of the Amicus Curiae’s report by

this Hon’ble Court.

27. The Amicus Curiae also submits that, as already recorded, the Royal

family of erstwhile Travancore has no desire to appropriate any treasure

of the Temple. On the contrary, the family has substantially contributed

to the Temple and hence the degree of anguish being experienced by the

Royal family on the suggestion of any malfeasance or taking away of the

property of the Temple is understandable. At the same time, it is

necessary that this Temple and its riches must be preserved because

temple treasures today are the object of considerable interest all over the

world. Hence, it is necessary that adequate security must be deployed in

and around the Temple so that no one can actually attempt any theft of

any of the precious ornaments.

Page 73 of 93

H. Extension of time for inventorisation

28. The Amicus Curiae has reviewed the inventorying work being conducted

by the Expert Committee. It is recommended that the extended time

frame requested by the Expert Committee may be sanctioned without

any alteration.

I. Recommendations on Temple renovation and restoration

29. The Amicus Curiae has held detailed discussions with Dr. M. Velayudhan

Nair and the Overseeing/Expert Committee. From these discussions, it

is clear that the Temple is in urgent need of renovation and restoration

of its priceless architecture, including the murals and the work done by

the sthapathis at the top of the . It is therefore necessary that an

Expert Group for restoration and renovation headed by Dr. M.

Velayudhan Nair immediately undertakes this task. Dr. M. Velayudhan

Nair may be supported by eminent historians such as Dr. M.G.

Sashibhooshan. It may be clarified that the restoration/renovation work

described in this paragraph is distinct from the restoration/renovation

work with respect to the Temple idols which is mentioned in the

supplementary recommendations later in this report.

J. Compiling the Temple’s traditions

30. The Amicus Curiae believes that the invaluable historical records and

padhdhati of the Temple must be compiled and its archaeological history

documented. This will have a bearing upon the traditions of the Temple.

The Amicus Curiae was introduced by Dr. M. Velayudhan Nair to a large

number of eminent historians who are deeply attached to the Temple.

Those historians have gladly offered their services as part of an Expert

Group which will study the historical material and compile all the

archaeologically relevant data which currently lies scattered in the

Page 74 of 93

Temple archives. The Amicus Curiae recommends that Dr. M.G.S.

Narayanan, Director General, Centre for Heritage Studies, and former

Chairman, ICHR, New Delhi, may be appointed as the Chairman of this

Expert Group, which should also plan to bring out a world-class

publication on the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple and the great

heritage of the people of Kerala at the end of its assignment. In addition

to Dr. M.G.S. Narayanan, the Expert Group will also enlist the services

of such eminent historians and academics as Dr. R.C. Misro from

Bhubaneswar; Dr. T.P. Sankarankutty Nair; Dr. M.G. Sashibhooshan; Dr.

N.P. Unni; Dr. V.S. Sharma; Dr. S. Padmanabhan; Dr. Leela Omchery;

Smt. Nandini Ramani; Dr. R.P. Raja; Princess Ashwathi Thirunal; Sri

M.S. Gopalakrishnan; and V. Chithra Devi.

31. In addition, the Amicus Curiae has suggested that all the musical

renditions for Lord Padmanabha Swamy, on which abundant literature

exists in the works of Muthuswamy Dikshitar, Thyagaraja, Swathi

Thirunal, Shyamasastry and other composers, need to be compiled. The

Amicus Curiae has suggested that the services of various eminent

Carnatic musicians such as Nithyasree Mahadevan, Trichur

Ramachandran, Aruna Sairam, Pappu Venugopala Rao, Vijay Shiva,

Abhishek Raghuram, Prince Rama Varma, Parashala Ponnammal and

Sudha Raghunathan may be enlisted for this project. Dr. M.G.S.

Narayanan may be appointed the Chairman of the Expert Group on

musical renditions and Dr. M. Velayudhan Nair may be appointed the

Coordinator.

K. Audit of Temple accounts and sources of funding

32. The Amicus Curiae submits that in order to ensure complete transparency

in the accounts of the Temple, the monies received by the Temple,

Page 75 of 93

including the daily collections, should be subject to a systematic and

transparent audit. To this end, it may be appropriate to appoint Sri S.

Gopalakrishnan (of M/s Srinivasa & Krishna, chartered accountants) as

the auditor of the Temple accounts. The auditor will assist the Chief

Executive Officer (who, as mentioned earlier, will be supported by two

Executive Officers) by regularly placing the Temple accounts before him

for review and further scrutiny.

33. The Amicus Curiae also believes that the Chief Executive Officer (and the

two Executive Officers) should first endeavour to raise funds for the

work relating to the Temple, particularly work relating to the

strengthening of the Temple vaults and renovation of the Temple

structure, with equal participation from the State Government and the

Temple Administration. In case of any difficulty in raising funds for

these purposes, the Chief Executive Officer can approach the Amicus

Curiae for appropriate directions from this Hon’ble Court.

34. The Amicus Curiae suggests that the Temple may also raise funds for the

above-mentioned renovation works through donations from devotees.

The Amicus Curiae is given to understand that a large number of

devotees of Lord Padmanabha Swamy would be willing to make

contributions for the purpose of restoring the Temple. It is important to

explore such alternate funding arrangements given that the State

Government must not be constantly overburdened with requests to

refurbish temples, especially those that are of unique heritage and

vintage. As far as possible, the Temple must be self-sustaining.

Donations can of course be received in a separate account which will be

audited by Sri S. Gopalakrishnan, chartered accountant.

Page 76 of 93

35. The Amicus Curiae further recommends the creation of a Trust consisting

of His Highness Sri Marthanda Varma, Justice M. N. Krishnan,

Dr. M. Velayudhan Nair, Sri Jai Kumar (the present Chief Secretary,

Government of Kerala) and Sri Adithya Varma, and one of the two

Executive Officers as ex-officio member secretary. The Trust would have

requisite exemptions under income tax laws so that donations can

conveniently be made by the public through it for the benefit of the

Temple.

36. The Amicus Curiae also acknowledges the fact that the numerous

supplementary recommendations made later in this report will involve

some expenditure. The Amicus Curiae therefore suggests that in respect

of all such matters connected with and arising out of the Temple, for e.g.,

the upachara, pooja, introduction of Vedic mantras and such other

activities for the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple, an opportunity

should first be given to the Royal family of the erstwhile State of

Travancore to make available any funds from any Trusts which they

may have to serve the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple. In the event

the Royal family is unable to make adequate resources available, the

same may be reported to this Hon’ble Court.

L. Listing the Temple as a World Heritage Site

37. Following discussions and suggestions from the Amicus Curiae, Dr. M.

Velayudhan Nair has started the process of proposing the Sree

Padmanabha Swamy Temple for inclusion in the World Heritage List.

For this purpose, a suitable proposal will have to be made to the State

Government, which will then have to be accepted by the Indian

Committee before being recommended to UNESCO for inclusion in the

‘tentative list’ of World Heritage Sites. If the suggestion fructifies, after

Page 77 of 93

being placed in the tentative list for one year, the Temple would be

placed in the World Heritage List. The Amicus Curiae undoubtedly

believes that the Temple is indeed a world heritage site given its

archaeological and historical significance. The Amicus Curiae suggests

that Sri Janhwij Sharma, Director (Conservation), Archaeological Survey

of India, may be requested to carry forward this proposal in consultation

with Dr. M.V. Nair.

M. Next steps on representations made to the Amicus Curiae

38. The Amicus Curiae received a number of representations from various

interest groups during his visit to the office of the Expert Committee on

29th September 2012. Some of them relate to grievances of employees and

lack of enforcement of various wage conditions. All these

representations may be examined by the Chief Executive Officer, in

consultation with Justice M. N. Krishnan, the Coordinator of the

Overseeing Committee.

N. Supplementary Recommendations

39. Without prejudice to the aforesaid recommendations, the Amicus Curiae

also suggests/recommends the following in the interest of the upkeep of

the Temple and the preservation of its heritage:

1) The Amicus Curiae has learnt that in 2011 a Deva Prasnam was held

in the Temple in which many orders were given by the Daivajnas

or the astrologers for immediate execution in the interest of the

Temple. The Chief Executive Officer in consultation with His

Highness Sri Marthanda Varma and the Tantris may follow and

implement such directions as are necessary.

Page 78 of 93

2) The rendition of Vishnu Sahasranamam must be made compulsory

along with Vedic chanting.

3) The Amicus Curiae submits that restoration of the moola vigraha in

the sanctum sanctorum of Lord Padmanabha Swamy, which uses

katu sharkara yogam, and the other Deities in the sanctum

sanctorum should be undertaken immediately and suitable

parihara should be done in respect of the same. The Amicus Curiae

has mentioned certain details concerning the vigrahas in a separate

note which has been submitted to this Hon’ble Court in a sealed

cover.

4) The Amicus Curiae further submits that the silver sheevli/utsava

idols of Sree Padmanabha, Sree Narasimha and Sree Krishna have

not been kept in a proper shape and there are problems with their

peethas. These idols have been found to be separated from their

respective bases. They must be repaired immediately in

consultation with the Tantris (particularly, Tharananalloor

Parameshwaram Nambuthirippadu and Satish Tharananalloor)

and Dr. Shastra Sharman Nambuthirippadu, and suitable parihara

should be done in respect of the same.

5) There may be a golden Meru Sree Chakram in the sanctum

sanctorum, subject to the opinion of the Pushpanjali Swamiyar, the

Tantris and His Holiness the Bharathi Teertha Swamigal of

Shringeri Mutt.

6) Physical cleanliness of the priests inside the kitchen is important.

Also, the kitchens must be kept clean and the food/prasadam

should be cooked in a hygienic atmosphere.

Page 79 of 93

7) Purity of the Naivedyam for all Deities must be maintained and for

this purpose the main Temple kitchen, as well as the Agrashala

Ganapathy’s kitchen, must be strictly supervised by a Priest.

8) It may be added that since the main Deity is composed of 12008

Salagramas, the Naivedyam has to be commensurate with the

power of the Deity. It is necessary to ensure that the correct

quantities of milk and pal payasam are offered to the Deity.

9) The Amicus Curiae submits that the Temple kitchens must be

reviewed every day to ensure that the prasadam is eaten by the

priests only after it is brought back from the sanctum sanctorum

for distribution.

10) The Amicus Curiae further submits that panakam is the main

offering at this shrine. Special care must be taken and standards

of purity should be maintained while preparing and offering this

great ‘Naivedyam’.

11) The devotees have complained about the presence of cockroaches

and other insects in the panakam many times. The food prepared

for the Lord should be made with utmost care, observing the

highest standards of hygiene.

12) Performance of Abhishekam must be of high standard. There must

be an area specially demarcated in the Temple, where articles for

daily Abhishekam can be safely stored. The number of tender

coconuts which are used for Abhishekam should be raised from 20

to 108.

13) There is an absence of proper distribution of prasadam to the

devotees. It should be undertaken properly and the

palapayasappura should be revamped into a clean prasadappura

Page 80 of 93

where a standardized prasadam distribution system can be put in

place.

14) Annadanam in the Oottupura near the Ganapathy shrine must be

properly streamlined and modernized to ensure the supply of

sattwik food only which is devoid of onions and garlic.

15) On the northern side, certain vendors sell ‘Naivedyam’. Naivedyam

is the prasadam which is offered to the Lord. However, the

vendors who are selling the said prasadam are not selling the one

cooked inside the Temple. Many devotees from North India and

other places are misled into buying such articles believing that it is

the real prasadam. This practice needs to be stopped forthwith.

16) Pure silk garments should be used for dressing the Moola Vigraha.

17) The Shaiva Salagramam in the sanctum sanctorum must be

properly ornated.

18) The flower garlands for Deities are now made in the Alankara

Mandapa next to the Abhisrnava Mandapam. The garlands are often

seen lying on the floor of the mandapam. This is highly

objectionable. In this regard, one Temple employee must

supervise the making of the flower garlands. This should be done

using plantain fibres instead of cotton threads. In other words,

vazha naru should replace cotton threads which are presently

being used for making flower garlands.

19) The lamps inside as well as outside the sanctum sanctorum must

be cleaned daily.

20) As far as the replacement of electrified lamps with oil lamps is

concerned, the same should be examined by Dr. Shastra Sharman

Page 81 of 93

Nambuthirippadu, Tharananalloor Parameshwaram

Nambuthirippadu and Satish Tharananalloor.

21) The sheeveli ritual has to be done on time.

22) The shrines of Vishwaksena, Veda and that of Sree Rama

have to be properly kept. Proper cleaning and more lighting is

required in all these shrines. A priest must be engaged in Sree

Rama’s sanctum for attending to the Deity the entire day.

23) It may be noted that the Agrashala Ganapathy Temple needs to be

carefully maintained as there is a distinct lack of cleanliness.

24) The idol of Lord has a unique place in the Sree

Padmanabha Swamy Temple. Special upacharas for Lord

Hanuman must also be performed. The same should be done

forthwith in consultation with Dr. Shastra Sharman

Nambuthirippadu and Satish Tharananalloor.

25) The Chief Executive Officer, or in his absence, one of the two

Executive Officers, must be present for daily Nirmalayam in the

Temple.

26) The Amicus Curiae submits that special attention should be given

for maintenance of the Thekkedom Sri Narasimha Murthy shrine.

There must be daily cleaning of the shrine which possesses great

power, and also its copper roof.

27) Suitable pujas, on a daily basis, must be offered in the Narasimha

Murthy Temple.

28) Vazhipadu/Seva details should be displayed near all the four

entrances of the Temple.

Page 82 of 93

29) There must be a separate stall managed completely by the Temple

where devotional pictures, CDs and other paraphernalia related to

Lord Padmanabha Swamy are sold.

30) There should be a monthly publication in the form of a newsletter

by the Temple highlighting the activities at the Temple.

31) A proper website of the Temple should be developed and

maintained to provide opportunities for the people/devotees at

home and abroad to perform various sevas for the Lord online

and to know about the great heritage and history of the Temple.

The said website may be developed by Sri Gautham

Padmanabhan.

32) The Chief Executive Officer must ensure that tenders are not

given to private parties for the supply of dhotis (mundu) and

vazhipadu thattu or offering plates containing thulasi leaves, fruits,

camphor, oil etc. to the devotees. Any tenders already given to

private parties should not be renewed. The Temple

Administration should directly take charge of the supply of these

items.

33) The Temple well which is near the southern entrance must be

maintained and cleaned.

34) Although it is covered with gold plates, the valia bali kallu near the

flag staff should be cleaned atleast thrice a week.

35) The Amicus Curiae submits that there are trade unions which also

seem to be asserting their presence. As far as possible, there

should only be one trade union (it is learnt that the Kerala High

Court had ordered the same). The said trade union must

Page 83 of 93

effectively interact with the Chief Executive Officer and the

Executive Officers.

36) It has been noticed that there is always a problem of managing the

crowd of devotees near the entrance through the eastern Gopuram.

This needs to be controlled.

37) The way leading to the Kodi-maram or Dhwaja sthambha should be

cleaned daily. As of now it is sticky and stinks with bats’

dropping.

38) The Natakashala Mukhappu and the space meant for Princesses of

the Royal family of the erstwhile State of Travancore to offer

prayers during festival sheevelies must be properly maintained and

cleaned.

39) During the sheevelies, unwashed red caps are used by the priests

and on these caps the utsava or sheevli idols of Sree Padmanabha

Swamy, Sri Narasimha and Sri Krishna are placed and then with

these silver idols, the priests circumambulate the Nalambalam three

times for each sheeveli. There must be space within the Temple to

regularly clean these red caps used by the priests for sheeveli.

40) There should be a smooth and healthy relationship between the

Temple Administration and the Temple staff.

41) Temple watchmen should not use abusive language at visiting

devotees and if they are seen using such language they should be

warned at the first instance. If they are found repeating such

behavior, the watchmen should be served with suspension

notices.

Page 84 of 93

42) Non-vegetarian food as well as liquor are being brought into the

‘Garuda kala samskarika samithi’ which is a cultural forum of the

Temple employees. This should be expressly prohibited and made

punishable.

43) Shockingly, there is an absence of thulasi plants in the Temple

complex. Thulasi leaves are dear to the Deity in the Temple. In

this regard, planting thulasi gardens in the vast areas of the

Temple is highly recommended.

44) Many a times, the Nambis sneeze and spit within the Temple

complex or inside the Nalambalam. This should be avoided.

45) Spitting and littering by the devotees, employees and priests has

to be stopped. People doing such undesirable acts should be

warned and then fined by the Temple guards. Sign boards can be

installed at various points at the Temple to inform the

devotees/priests/employees to avoid such acts.

46) The Padmatheertham needs to be cleaned. Similarly, the tank in

which the Tantris take a bath, i.e., Mitranandapuram tank must also

be cleaned regularly. It is unfortunate that attention is not being

paid either to the Padmatheertham or to the Mitranandapuram tank.

(The Amicus Curiae has learnt that the Mitranandapuram tank was

cleaned some time back because of a Court order. However, it is

unfortunate that the Courts have to order the cleaning of temple

tanks.)

47) The public road leading to the Eastern Gopuram is unclean and

badly maintained. Tourist buses and other vehicles are parked

there and many shops have been established by the side of the

road. The shops must be removed and the buses should not be

Page 85 of 93

allowed to park near the Temple premises for security purposes as

well as for maintaining cleanliness.

48) There is no suggestion box for the devotees to give feedback to the

Temple authorities. These must be installed near all the four

entrances to the Temple and the suggestions should be reviewed

by the Chief Executive Officer and the two Executive Officers.

49) There are no guides for the visiting devotees. Trained guides

should be made available and the fees may be fixed by the Temple

Administration.

50) There is no system for reviewing the salaries of the Temple

employees and for the payment of the same. The Temple

Administration should look into this aspect as well.

51) Once every fortnight/month, separate training programmes

should be undertaken for the following:-

(a) Temple priests (by the Tantri);

(b) Temple guards (by the Temple commander);

(c) Sweepers (by the Sweeping Supervisor or Puranthali

vicharippu);

(d) Nadaswaram and other instrumentalists (by an expert);

(e) Other employees (by the Chief Executive Officer/Executive

Officers);

These individuals have to be constantly reminded/updated about

the rituals of the Temple to maintain a spiritual atmosphere and

for the proper and effective discharge of their duties.

52) The salary of the Swamiyar should be increased.

Page 86 of 93

53) There should be health checkups for the Temple employees at

regular intervals.

54) There should be separate parking lots for the Temple employees

near the four main entrances or ‘Nadaas’ of the Temple.

55) The buildings and lands of the Temple which have been illegally

occupied by various people and organizations must be claimed

back and put to suitable use.

56) There must be strict supervision in all the centres where donations

to the Temple are counted with the help of cameras to avoid thefts

and other mischiefs.

57) There should be a ‘goshala’ in the Temple premises for supplying

milk in required quantities to the Temple kitchen.

58) Proper maintenance of the Abhisravana mandapam where utsava

rites take place, twice a year, is necessary.

59) The area near the Eastern Nada is dirty and there are

unauthorized vendors/persons who have occupied the said Nada.

The Eastern Nada needs to be cleaned up immediately. Many of

the vendors are selling articles which are used for Archana. The

Archana tickets which are issued by the Temple are intended only

for the purpose of receipt of pushpam and chandanam as prasadam

from the Temple. It may also be pointed out that it is not in the

tradition of the Temple to bring articles from outside to offer to

the Deities. Therefore, the unauthorized vendors should be kept

away from the Temple premises.

60) It is not in the tradition of this Temple to conduct marriages by

exchanges of garlands or otherwise. This is a Temple with great

Page 87 of 93

Achara where maximum amount of cleanliness is expected to be

maintained. Such activities, as are not done in accordance with

the tradition of the Temple, must be discontinued.

61) Usually, devotees are taken into the Temple, from the left to right

direction. This is a tradition which is followed in all temples, both

in North and South India. However, the manner in which the

devotees are being guided in the Sree Padmanabha Swamy

Temple does not conform to the traditional method of taking

pradakshna or parikrama at the Temple. This needs to be corrected.

62) There are some unconfirmed reports that money lending business

is also going on in the Temple premises. The security

administrator and the guards should ensure that such unwanted

activities do not take place.

63) The Amicus Curiae is of the opinion that the entry through the

South Nada should be stopped for the present so that there is

adequate access control in respect of the other entry points in the

Temple.

64) The Chief Executive Officer, along with the two Executive

Officers, must ensure total cleanliness and hygiene in every part

of the Temple, including in all the brass lamps, the toilets, the

public amenities as well as the place where the payasam is

distributed in plastic glasses which has led to unclean

surroundings near the South Nada.

65) In view of the fact that there are two Madhoms, i.e., the Naduvil

Madhom and the Munjeera Madhom whose Swamiyars are

supposed to be involved as the spiritual heads of the Temple, their

participation must be made mandatory. The present Pushpanjali

Swamiyar of the Naduvil Madhom as well as the Munjeera

Page 88 of 93

Madhom may be requested to immediately resume their visits and

duties to the Temple. In the event that any other person wishes to

offer pushpanjali, the same should be reviewed by His Highness

Sri Marthanda Varma in accordance with the advice to be

rendered by Dr. Shastra Sharman Nambuthirippadu,

Tharananalloor Parameshwaram Nambuthirippadu and Satish

Tharananalloor.

66) In the event any person is found unsuitable in any administrative

capacity, His Highness Sri Marthanda Varma should take suitable

steps for his/her removal in consultation with Justice M. N.

Krishnan.

67) Some of the priests or Shanthies meant to assist the four Nambis are

seen in unclean attire. There must be a proper check on the

cleanliness of the dress each of the priests, who should strictly

adhere to the dress code.

68) Each of the Nambis has to be examined to see whether they are

doing the pujas properly, especially in the smaller shrines.

69) A panel, consisting of Dr. Shastra Sharman Nambuthirippadu,

Tharananalloor Parameshwaram Nambuthirippadu, and Satish

Tharananalloor, should examine the Tantris. The examination

should test the knowledge of the Tantris in Shastras, Vedic

literature and Tantric practices and procedure to worship the

Deity.

70) As far as the Nambis are concerned, it is important that they are

instructed in the Vedic texts which are necessary for puja in the

Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple. They should be given

instructions in the chanting of the Purushasukta, Sreesukta as well

Page 89 of 93

as Bhagyasukta. Training must be given under the direct

supervision of Dr. Shastra Sharman Nambuthirippadu, President

of the Tantra Vidya Peetham. Each of the Nambis has to be

examined to see whether they are doing the pujas properly,

especially in the smaller shrines.

71) The Nambis have to come to the Temple from their Madhoms

located at a distance from the Temple within the fort area and

sometimes they enter the Temple without washing their feet. It

must be ensured that they wash their feet thoroughly before

entering the main gates of the Temple. This should apply to other

priests as well.

72) The newly appointed Nambis must visit Anantheshwaram,

Kasargode district and Tiruvattar, Kanyakumari district shrines

before they take charge, as per the conventions of the Temple.

73) The Nambis need to be initiated into the mantras by the chief

Tantri and this must be overseen by Dr. Shastra Sharman

Nambuthirippadu, Tharananalloor Parameshwaram

Nambuthirippadu and Satish Tharananalloor.

74) Any person including Shanthi, Nambi or Tantri who has had a

death in the family or a birth must not enter the Temple. In

accordance with the traditions of the Temple, during the period

which is considered as the period of abstention (pollution), such

persons must not enter the Temple.

75) The religious rites and ceremonies in Sree Padmanabha Swamy

Temple, such as Bhadradeepam, Chakrabhja puja and Jalajapam which

used to be performed earlier, must now be restarted.

Page 90 of 93

76) It may also be necessary to consider employing the services of a

retired police officer for effective security administration and to

ensure administrative discipline within the Temple. The Amicus

Curiae suggests the name of Sri K.V. Gopalakrishnan, a retired IPS

officer of the Intelligence Bureau for this role. In the event Sri

Gopalakrishnan is unavailable, Sri Rangachari, former Chairman,

Board of Direct Taxes, may be requested. This appointee must

work in association with the Kerala Police which is currently

providing security at the Temple and will support the office of the

Chief Executive Officer.

77) Vendors inside the Temple have been appointed through a tender.

However, the security administration is of the opinion that the

presence of such vendors inside the Temple on the Eastern Nada

(Thiruvambadi Nada) poses a security risk. The Chief Executive

Officer, along with the two Executive Officers, should therefore

attempt to remove these vendors in a peaceful manner while

giving them some alternative place to continue their activities.

Justice M. N. Krishnan, Coordinator of the Overseeing Committee, may

be requested to implement such recommendations as are found

acceptable by this Hon’ble Court. In addition, the State Government

must be directed to ensure that no one should obstruct the execution of

the recommendations and suggestions found acceptable.

IV. EPILOGUE

1. The Amicus Curiae wishes to state that the Hon’ble Chief Minister of the

State of Kerala was extremely kind and he offered the fullest cooperation

in matters relating to the Temple. The Chief Minister and the

Page 91 of 93

Government of Kerala have also shown a high degree of statesmanship

and dignity in not wanting to be seen as unduly interested in the

Temple, its affairs or its wealth. Instead, they have endeavoured to allow

the Temple to be a self-sustaining institution in a manner which will be

transparent.

2. The Amicus Curiae also wishes to state that no hospitality was received

from any person during his visit and all expenditures towards the stay

of the Amicus Curiae and his team members was borne by the Amicus

Curiae alone. It may also be added that Dr. M. Velayudhan Nair who

was with the Amicus Curiae throughout the visit, as well as Justice M. N.

Krishnan, rendered valuable advice and showed deep interest in the

affairs of the Temple.

3. It must of course be recorded that this Hon’ble Court has acted at critical

times, but to act critically in a matter of faith involving a temple is an

unusual occasion. The local citizenry in Thiruvananthapuram are

extremely happy that this Hon’ble Court has intervened and they hope

that the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple will continue to serve and

please its devotees in the traditional way as always. After seeing the

goodwill as well as the extreme piety of the Royal family, for whom Sree

Padmanabha Swamy is their life-blood, the cooperative attitude of the

State Government, the scholarship and the extraordinary manner in

which the inventorying work has been undertaken by Dr. M.

Velayudhan Nair (who, incidentally, is also a member of various

international bodies in archaeology) and his team, the Amicus Curiae is

more than happy to report that the choice of persons could not have

been more ideal.

Page 92 of 93

4. Before parting, the Amicus Curiae adds that Dr. M. Velayudhan Nair is

correct in envisioning the work at the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple

as the beginning of pioneering efforts to scientifically restore all temples

in India. Dr. M. Velayudhan Nair’s advice could not have come at a

more opportune time. The Amicus Curiae has therefore suggested to Dr.

M. Velayudhan Nair that multiple workshops should be held with

scientists and archaeologists of repute from all over the world so that

modern scientific understanding of India’s heritage and architectural

marvels can be enhanced.

5. However, the Amicus Curiae must sound a note of caution as well.

Increasingly in this country, political parties and certain members of the

political class look for priceless treasures in temples and often form

unholy combinations to enter temples for purposes which are hardly

legitimate. It is necessary to insulate the Sree Padmanabha Swamy

Temple from such kinds of extraneous considerations. It is also

important to protect the treasures of the Sree Padmanabha Swamy

Temple from any devious or extraneous form of appropriation. It is

common knowledge that ever since the vaults have been opened, great

interest has been shown in the Temple in India and abroad. It is

therefore all the more important that this Temple has a proper

administration that can effectively and constantly supervise, manage

and protect the Temple’s affairs.

New Delhi Gopal Subramanium 29.10.2012 Amicus Curiae

Page 93 of 93

Annexure A

List of participants at the Joint Meeting of the Expert Committee and

the Overseeing Committee held on 29.09.2012

Venue: Office of the Expert Committee, Ramanamadam, Vadakkenada,

Fort, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala.

Time: 1700 hrs

PARTICIPANTS

1. Shri Gopal Subramanium, Amicus Curiae

2. Justice Shri M.N.Krishnan, Coordinator, Overseeing Committee

3. Shri Adithya Varma, Member, Overseeing Committee

4. Dr. M. Velayudhan Nair, Coordinator, Expert Committee

5. Dr. M Nambirajan, Member, Expert Committee

6. Shri V.K.Harikumar, Member, Expert Committee

7. Shri C. Karthikeyan Nair, Administrative Officer, Expert Committee

8. Shri C. Balaraman, Director of Mining & Geology, Govt. of Kerala

9. Shri P. K. Satheesan, Chief Engineer, PWD (Bldgs), Govt. of Kerala

10. Shri C. Prasannakumar, Managing Director, KELTRON, Trivandrum

11. Shri K M Gopinath, Executive Director, KELTRON, Trivandrum

12. Smt Beena Mathew, General Manager, KELTRON, Trivandrum

13. Shri Jayakumar, Deputy General Manager, KELTRON, Trivandrum

14. Shri P. Vimaladitya, DCP(L&O), Kerala Police, Trivandrum

15. Shri Vijayakumar, DCP(SPST), Kerala Police, Trivandrum

16. Shri T. Saboo, Engineer, ISRO, Trivandrum.

17. Shri P. Anilkumar, Sr. Architect, Govt. of Kerala, Trivandrum

18. Shri Apoorv Kurup, Advocate, Office of the Amicus Curiae

19. Shri Nishit Agrawal, Advocate, Office of the Amicus Curiae