The Kerala High Court has disposed of a suo motu case initiated based on the Sabarimala Special Commissioner’s report regarding the alleged misappropriation of funds in the purchase of puja materials for Ashtabhishekam at Sabarimala and the supply of materials by Sunil Kumar a.k.a Sunil Swamy.
A Division Bench of Justices Raja Vijayaraghavan and K.V. Jayakumar observed that the Travancore Devaswom Board had resolved that all Vazhipadu materials would be procured, stored, and issued exclusively through the Central Store of the board. This would end the practice of entrusting the procurement of such materials to the administrative officer or any other officer in the capacity of a supplier or contractor, the court noted.
The board informed the court that the entire inventory management of the Central Store would be fully digitised. Materials received from sponsors would only be accepted through the Central Store with receipts issued accordingly. The materials so received would be subjected to strict quality and safety checks by the officers of the Food Safety department at the Sannidhanam before they were used at the temple.
The court held that the practice of an administrative officer functioning as a supplier or contractor was wholly inappropriate. It violated the principles of transparency and accountability and could give rise to abuse of official position, the court stated.
The board was directed to review the procurement practices followed in all other temples under the board and ensure that similar arrangements, if existing elsewhere, are discontinued in a time-bound manner so as to “eliminate avenues for arbitrariness, favouritism, and corruption.”
The court had previously directed an audit of the Ashtabhishekam Vazhipadu ledger, and the Audit Department had reported that no stock register or ledger was maintained for Vazhipadu articles such as milk, panineer and tender coconut procured directly by the administrative officer.
The audit had also reported that a total of 31,313 Vazhipadus were conducted over 10 years, and the supplier cost claimed by various administrative officers was reported as ₹93,93,900. In this regard, the board had reported that the amount was fully remitted to the Devaswom Fund and only the allowed supplier cost was claimed by the respective administrative officers.
Published – July 22, 2026 12:01 am IST
