Case Title: The Travancore Devaswom Board Versus Ayyappa Spices and Ors.
Case No: Civil Appeal NO.3866 – 3867 of 2024 arising out of SLP (C) NOS. 10361 – 10362 of 2023
Decided on:11-04-2023
Quorum: Judge Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha
Facts of the case:
The board, a legislative entity, is in charge of overseeing a few temples in southern India. It is an appeal of the Kerala High Court’s ruling to grant a writ petition brought as a public interest lawsuit by a business concerning the tender for obtaining raw materials for Aravana Prasadam preparation at the Sabarimala Temple in Kerala. Cardamom is one of the raw materials. With 9000 kg of cardamom, the responding first bidder in 2021 was successful. The appellant board released a tender on June 16, 2022, to purchase cardamoms for the period of November 1, 2022, to September 30, 2023. Due to the bids’ excessively high pesticide content, the next two were canceled. On August 24, 2022, a new tender was submitted once more. However, the new tender was also canceled for the same rationale. Due to the holiday season, the third tender was launched on October 12, 2022, after the first two failed. And Cardamom is in a dire situation. The Sabarimala Temple’s executive officer will purchase cardamom from nearby suppliers. After that, the four offers were obtained. The samples that the four bidders supplied were forwarded for analysis. Due to their failure to meet the maximum criteria, two of them are cancelled. They place an order with responder 2 for 7000 kg, which they then submit for further cardamom analysis. There were a lot of pesticides in the second respondent’s proposal. Next, a writ petition was filed by the first respondent.
Legal provisions:
The Writ of Mandamus stated that the respondents were to conduct an analysis of the cardamom that was purchased after the cancellation of the tender under the supervision of this court.
The Writ of Certiorari stated that to cancel the local purchase of cardamom as it was done without competition or advertisement.
Appellant contentions:
It was contended that Aravana Prasadam is not a sale for revenue or profits, but considered as an offering to devotees. It was submitted that the Aravana Prasadam holds religious significance to devotees, and is treated as an offering from the deity itself. FSSAI gave the quality check permission but the court did not dismiss the writ petition. It leads to loss of our business and affects our competition. Board itself takes all measures to ensure that the health of the devotees is never compromised Two questions emerge for our consideration – (i) whether the writ petition at the behest of respondent no. 1 should have been entertained by the High Court; and (ii) whether the appellant-Board qualifies as a “food business operator” as defined under Section 3(1)(j) of the Act. In a recent decision, UFLEX Ltd. V. Government of Tamil Nadu, Civil Appeal Nos. 4862-63 of 2021, this Court has held that constitutional courts should exercise caution while interfering in contractual and tender matters, disguised as public interest litigations.
Respondent contentions:
It was contended that the High Court should not have entertained the writ petition and should have dismissed it at the very threshold. He relied on the decisions of this Court in S.P. Gupta v. Union of India, 1981 Supp SCC 87 and Ashok Kumar Pandey v. State of West Bengal, (2004) 3 SCC 349 for this purpose .Learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 1 made submissions regarding their bonafide action in initiating the PIL in this case. It asserted that its primary intent was not to hinder the distribution of Aravana Prasadam but to highlight malpractices within the administration of the Sabarimala Temple, one such issue is the opaque manner in which the supply order was issued to respondent no. 2 i.e., without open tenders.
Court Analysis and Judgment:
The court orders that devotees can receive Aravana Prasadam on March 27, 2023. The appeal was granted by the high court, which also ordered that the appellant board be prosecuted for violating the Good Safety and Standards Act. The appellant board operates a food business, and the seized goods will be destroyed legally. Eventually, on April 11, 2023, the court granted the writ petition, allowing the FSSAI to inspect Aravana Prasadam for quality. The court makes it clear that humans can eat parsadam.
According to the board, it is an untouchable ceremonial practice and offering. Our goal is not to make money from it. According to the court, the purpose of the Aravana Prasadam is to draw attention to the wrongdoings in the temple. The appeal was granted by the high court, which also ordered that the appellant board be prosecuted for violating the Good Safety and Standards Act. The appellant board operates a food business, and the seized goods will be destroyed legally.
Eventually, on April 11, 2023, the court granted the writ petition, allowing the FSSAI to inspect Aravana Prasadam for quality. The court makes it clear that humans can eat prasadam. According to the board, it is an untouchable ceremonial practice and offering. Our goal is not to make money from it. According to the court, the purpose of the Aravana Prasadam is to draw attention to the irregularities in the Sabarimala Temple’s management, not to evade distribution. A problem exists with both open and closed tenders. Lacking a suitable quality inspection.
The samples were sent to the FSSAI headquarters by the high court. According to them, the product was dangerous (KB 11-01-2023).It is not intended to satisfy one’s appetite, but rather is sacred and symbolic. The board made a judgment that is fair, legal, and transparent. The writ petition was filed by an interested party who wanted to use a judicial review process to further their own interests, and the High Court should not have granted the petition.
Since the notice to buy cardamom was posted on the notice board, all potential bidders were given an equal opportunity to participate, and the appellant board’s judgment was made without bias or malice. Because the High Court is an independent body, it dismissed the writ petition on the grounds of maintainability. The inventory that was on hand should be destroyed in accordance with the government’s protocol, and fresh Aravana Prasadam will be kept for the upcoming season. Additionally, the contract that was awarded to the respondent was not unlawful. It dismiss the writ petition.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.
Judgement Analysis Written by – K.Immey Grace
Click here to view the judgement
