HomePoliticsCPI(M) and DYFI persons are ineligible to be trustees of Pookkottukalikavu...

CPI(M) and DYFI persons are ineligible to be trustees of Pookkottukalikavu Temple: Supreme Court

Three people — two native CPI(M) representatives or one DYFI figure — have all been unqualified to serve as non-hereditary guardians of the Pookkottukalikavu Temples underneath the Malabar Devaswom Authority, according to a ruling made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on Wednesday.
According to MV Govindan, the CPI(M) regional superintendent, national leaders, or leading organizations shouldn’t run temples.

“That is where we are. We agree with what the Division Bench said. None of them should be in charge of running or preside over temple operations, whether from the Congress, RSS, BJP, or Marxist party, “said he.

Between the party’s nationwide month-long Peoples choices Protection March, which started in Kasaragod on Monday, and a press conference with local reporters on Wednesday, Mr. Govindan was in the district.

Three people — two local CPI(M) leaders and one DYFI leader — were unqualified to serve as non-hereditary administrators of the Pookkottukalikavu Temple underneath the Malabar Devaswom Authority in Ottapalam taluk of Palakkad district, according to a ruling by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on Tuesday.

Hence, the judge had stated, “Individuals who are substantially passionate about politics, irrespective of whether they occupy any position in a political party, are ineligible.”

One of the nominees, who held a local office in DYFI, the CPI(Youth )’s wing, claimed that since DYFI did not represent a government institution, he was not disqualified from serving as a trustee.
The top court dismissed the argument.
“The DYFI manifesto clarifies that the organization focuses on democracy or associated matters, regardless of its status as affiliated with any specific party. As a result, it is impossible to say that DYFI’s actions aren’t ideological, “The judge continued.

Mr. Govindan, though, disagreed with the supreme court’s decision in this instance because he believed that DYFI did not constitute a democratic entity.
He claimed that DYFI was a group for young people who did not have allegiances.

Latest news

Related news