Nanditha Raj vs State Of Kerala And Ors

P.B. Suresh Kumar, J

Petitioner is a minor child aged below ten years. It is stated that her parents had made a vow before the birth of the petitioner that they would take

the petitioner once for Sabarimala darshan. In order to fulfil the said vow, the parents of the petitioner applied for booking for darshan in the online

portal for Sabarimal darshan. It is stated that though the parents of the petitioner could secure bookings for darshan, the petitioner could not secure

booking as the system is not accepting the request for booking made on behalf of the petitioner as she is aged below 10 years. The case of the

petitioner is that there is absolutely no justification for denying entry to the petitioner to the Sabarimala temple. It is also the case of the petitioner that

if she crosses the age of 10 years, her parents may not be able to take her for darshan. She therefore seeks, appropriate directions in this regard in the

writ petition.

A statement has been filed on behalf of the second respondent. The stand taken in the said statement is that entry is denied to the petitioner in the

light of Annexure R2(a) decision taken by the Government on 28.09.2020 as part of the measures to prevent the spread of Covid-19 pandemic.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader as also the learned Standing Counsel for the third respondent.

The learned Government Pleader has reiterated the stand taken by the second respondent in the statement filed in the matter. In addition, it was

also pointed out by the learned Government Pleader that this Court has permitted implementation of Annexure R2(a) decision in the order passed on

S.S.C.R. No.9 of 2020.

A perusal of Annexure R2(a) indicates that a meeting was convened by the Chief Minister of the State for arriving at the various measures to be

taken for preventing the spread of Covid-19 pandemic during 2020-2021 pilgrimage season of the temple and the decisions taken in the said meeting

includes a decision that children aged below 10 years need not be permitted to visit the temple during season. As pointed out by the learned

Government Pleader, it is seen that this Court permitted implementation of the measures taken in the meeting held on 28.09.2020. The operative

portion of the order in S.S.C.R. No.9 of 2020 reads thus:

Subject to the aforementioned issues, which according to us require a reconsideration at the appropriate level with the participation of TDB, we are of

the view that the other decisions taken in the Chief Minister's meeting as also taken by the Chief Secretary's Committee can be implemented during

this Mandala-Makaravilakku season as they were taken with the object of avoiding spread of COVID-19 pandemic. Even while ordering thus we are

of the view that as regards the rituals and liturgy to be performed during the Mandala-Makaravilakku season, they shall be performed without any

hindrance, due to the restrictions.

It is evident from Annexure R2(a) minutes as also the order passed in S.S.C.R. No.9 of 2020 by this Court that the restrictions mentioned therein

were intended to be implemented during 2020-2021 pilgrimage season. Now, admittedly, the pilgrimage season is over.

The decisions taken in the meeting convened by the Chief Minister on 28.09.2020 and the order passed by this Court in S.S.C.R. No.9 of 2020 cannot

therefore be an impediment for permitting the petitioner to have darshan at the temple.

In the circumstances, the writ petition is allowed and respondents 1 and 2 are directed to ensure that the petitioner is able to visit the temple along with

her parents on the day on which the parents of the petitioner have obtained booking for darshan. The registry is directed to serve a copy of this

judgment to the office of the Advocate General for communication to respondents 1 and 2 for compliance of the direction.