The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has objected to the proposal of Communist Party of India (Marxist) [CPI(M)] State unit secretary Pinarayi Vijayan that the Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple be brought under a separate Devaswom board in the State.
Addressing a news conference here on Thursday, BJP State unit president V. Muraleedharan wondered why the CPI(M) was in a hurry to bring the temple management under the State government. Perhaps the party had an eye on the huge assets of the temple, he said.
The BJP was responding to Mr. Vijayan criticising the recommendations of the Supreme Court appointed amicus curiae Gopal Subramanian suggesting that the High Court of Kerala “may consider appointing a Chief Executive Officer.”
In his report, Mr. Subramanian said that Adithya Varma, the representative of the Marthanada Varma in the overseeing committee, “is most suited for his role because he visits the temple daily, besides having an intimate connection with the temple.”
A security threat
Special Correspondent writes from Thiruvananthapuram: Janata Dal (Secular) legislator Jameela Prakasam accused the amicus curiae of having exceeded his brief and said that there was no historical basis for several of his conclusions and recommendations.
In a statement here, Ms. Prakasam said that the valuables found in the Sree Padmanabha Swamy temple vaults were part of the public assets of the erstwhile Travancore kingdom.
Keeping the valuables in the temple would pose a security threat to the entire capital city.
The State government should, therefore, apprise the Supreme Court about the need to shift the valuables to either strong rooms of the State Bank of India or State Bank of Travancore, she said.
Since the temple was being administered under the overall supervision of the ruling family of erstwhile Travancore, the shortcomings in administration pointed out by the Amicus Curiae only went to show the need for takeover of the temple by the government.
The amicus curiae’s report appeared intended only to transfer control of the temple to the ruling family of erstwhile Travancore.
Amicus curiae exceeded brief: MLA ‘Valuables part of public assets of erstwhile Travancore’
Amicus curiae exceeded brief: MLA
‘Valuables part of public assets of erstwhile Travancore’