Facts of the Case

This case arises under the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950, governing management of the Sabarimala Devaswom — it is not a GST law ruling, even though GST registration was one of several eligibility conditions in the tender documents. Several petitioners (S. Vijayakumar, Anish Raj, Abdul Razak Hilal, Anoop Raj, and Udayakumar S.), in five connected writ petitions, challenged aspects of an e-tender process for auctioning “Kuthaka” rights (temple-premises vending/trading rights) at Sabarimala Devaswom for the Mandala-Makaravilakku festival season 2023-24, floated by the Executive Officer, Sabarimala vide notification dated 24 August 2023.

Clause (7) of the general conditions required bidders to submit Income Tax returns for three years and GST registration with a three-year summary statement for certain categories of Kuthaka items. Petitioners alleged that certain successful bidders (respondents 5 to 8 across the petitions) did not meet these conditions, and that one successful bidder had previously defaulted on a bid amount for an earlier year. The Travancore Devaswom Board (Ext.P3 order dated 21 September 2023) confirmed bids for several items and later relaxed the three-year GST/IT conditions for the remaining items put out for re-e-tender. Different petitioners raised overlapping grievances about which bids were confirmed, which items were re-tendered, and whether the disqualification criteria were applied consistently.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the Travancore Devaswom Board's confirmation of certain bids, despite alleged non-compliance with the three-year GST registration/Income Tax returns eligibility condition, was valid.
  2. Whether relaxation of that condition (limiting it to current GST registration and one year's IT returns) for the re-e-tender was arbitrary.
  3. Whether bidders who had defaulted on earlier Kuthaka bid amounts were correctly disqualified or wrongly allowed to participate.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • Successful bidders in several Kuthaka items had not submitted Income Tax returns and GST summary statements for three years as required by the original eligibility conditions, and were therefore ineligible.
  • One successful bidder was a defaulter in payment of a balance bid amount for a Kuthaka item from an earlier year and was pending litigation over that default, making him disqualified under the tender conditions.
  • Some petitioners who had submitted the required GST and Income Tax documents were nonetheless denied the award, and re-e-tender was ordered instead of accepting their bids.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Travancore Devaswom Board filed counter affidavits opposing the reliefs, contending that several petitioners themselves had failed to produce the requisite Income Tax returns and GST statements and were therefore correctly disqualified.
  • The Board's relaxation of the three-year condition (to current GST registration and the previous year's IT returns alone) was within its administrative discretion in re-tendering the remaining items.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court traced the statutory duties of the Travancore Devaswom Board under Sections 15A, 24 and 31 of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950, and reiterated, citing precedent, that a Kuthaka defaulter is disqualified from participating in a fresh tender/e-tender under the general conditions.
  • Rather than ruling definitively on each disputed bid, the Court directed the Travancore Devaswom Board to conduct a joint verification — by the Commissioner and the Senior Deputy Director, Kerala State Audit Department — of the eligibility of the highest bidders in the confirmed Kuthaka items, including their compliance with Clause (7) (GST registration and IT returns) and absence of default/blacklisting, in the presence of the respective bidders and petitioners.
  • Bids found compliant on verification were to be confirmed; non-compliant ones were to go to re-e-tender, with refund of amounts already paid by disqualified bidders (provided they were not themselves defaulters).

Important Clarification

The Court did not rule on any GST law question — GST registration and returns featured only as one item in a temple-tender eligibility checklist. The practical takeaway is procedural: rather than deciding disputed eligibility itself, the High Court directed an independent joint verification process, leaving the final eligibility determination to the Devaswom Board and Audit Department.

Sections Involved

  • Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950 — Sections 15A, 24, 31

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of without a final decision on the merits of each disputed bid. The writ petitions were disposed of with directions for joint verification of bidders' eligibility, granting procedural relief to the petitioners without confirming or rejecting any specific bid outright.

Case Details

Court: High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam
Case No.: WP(C) No. 31339 of 2023, with connected WP(C) Nos. 31988, 32051, 32053 and 32085 of 2023
Coram: Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Sophy Thomas
Date of Judgment: 6 October 2023

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.