LOKMANYA TILAK LAW COLLEGE, PUNE FIFTH STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

LOKMANYA TILAK LAW COLLEGE, PUNE FIFTH

STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

IN THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

(CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) PUBLIC
INTEREST LITIGATION
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.: OF 2019
(A petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus or any other
appropriate writs seeking directions and/or guidelines in respect of prohibition of entry of women between
the age of 10 years to 50 years in Karimala Temple, Serela)

IN THE MATTER OF
Public Spirited Lawyers
Association, Serela
... Appellent

Versus
1. Devappa Devasom Board and
2. State Government of Serela
3. Union of India
... Respondents
All respondents are contesting respondents

To
The Hon‟ble Chief Justice of India
And his companion Justices of the Supreme Court of India
The Special Leave Petition of the Appellent above named
- Filed by the Advocate of the Appellent(s)

RESPONDENT‟S MEMORIAL
Page 1 of 18
 LOKMANYA TILAK LAW COLLEGE, PUNE FIFTH STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

INDEX
Contents Page No.

1) Index 1

2) Notice of Motion 2

3) Certificate 3

4) Urgency Application 4

5) Array of Parties 5

6) Writ Petition

a Abbreviations used 6

b Authority Index 7

c Statement of Jurisdiction 8

d Facts of the case 9

e Question of Law 10

7) Grounds 11

8) Prayer 17

RESPONDENT‟S MEMORIAL
Page 2 of 18
 LOKMANYA TILAK LAW COLLEGE, PUNE FIFTH STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

Notice of Motion

Sir/Madam,

Please find enclosed the accompanying response to the petition along with its annexures that has been
filed before Hon‟ble Supreme Court on behalf of the Appellents. The matter is likely to be listed before
the Hon‟ble Court on or on any other day as per the convenience of Hon‟ble Court.

Respectfully Submitted,
Through

Mr. Vakil
ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT(S)

Dated: 23/2/2019

Place: New Delhi

RESPONDENT‟S MEMORIAL
Page 3 of 18
 LOKMANYA TILAK LAW COLLEGE, PUNE FIFTH STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

CERTIFICATE

Hereby it is certified that an identical copies of the submission have been delivered to the Appellents‟
counsel.

Respectfully Submitted,
Through

Mr. Vakil
ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT(S)

Dated: 23/2/2019
Place: New Delhi

RESPONDENT‟S MEMORIAL
Page 4 of 18
 LOKMANYA TILAK LAW COLLEGE, PUNE FIFTH STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

Urgency application

To

The Registrar

Supreme Court of India

Subject: Application for Urgent Listing of the matter

Ref.: WP (CIVIL) NO.: OF 2019

Sir,

Kindly treat the accompanying response to the petition as urgent. The ground of urgency is the fact that
the appellants have challenged the existing rules for the entries of women inside the temple. Therefore,
urgent intervention of the Hon‟ble Court is sought in the matter. Hence, kindly list this matter before the
Hon‟ble Court urgently.

Respectfully Submitted,
Through

Mr. Vakil
ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDET(S)

Dated: 23/2/2019
Place: New Delhi

RESPONDENT‟S MEMORIAL
Page 5 of 18
 LOKMANYA TILAK LAW COLLEGE, PUNE FIFTH STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

Array of Parties

1. Public Spirited Lawyers Association, Serela … Appellent No. 1

VERSUS

1. Devappa Devasom Board

Through the members of the Board … Respondent No. 1

2. State Government of Serela

Through its Chief Secretary, Serela Secretariat ... Respondent No. 2

3. Union of India
Through Ministry of Home Affairs … Respondent No. 3

RESPONDENT‟S MEMORIAL
Page 6 of 18
 LOKMANYA TILAK LAW COLLEGE, PUNE FIFTH STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

Abbreviations

Sr. Abbreviation Full form

1 Hon‟ble Honourable

2 UOI Union of India

3 SC Supreme Court of India

4 Mah. Maharashtra

The Serela Hindu Places of Public Worship

5 The 1965 rules/ act
(Authorisations of Entry) Rules/Act, 1965

5 Sec. Section

6 v/s or v. Versus

7 Ors. Others

8 AIR All India Reporter

9 SCC Supreme Court Cases

11 Art. Article

12 Anr. Another

13 Ind. India

RESPONDENT‟S MEMORIAL
Page 7 of 18
 LOKMANYA TILAK LAW COLLEGE, PUNE FIFTH STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

Authority Index

1. Deepak Sibal v. Punjab University and another [(1989) 2 SCC 145]

2. Commissioner of Police and others v Acharya Jagadishwarananda Avadhuta and another [(2004) 12 SCC

770]

3. Vishaka and others v. State of Rajasthan and others [(1997) 6 SCC 241]

4. Sri Venkataramana Devaru and others v. State of Mysore, 1958 SCR 895/ AIR 1958 SC 255 (Devaru case)

5. Adi Saiva Sivachariyargal Nala Sangam and Ors. v. The Government of Tamil Nadu and Ors., AIR 2016

SC 209

6. Manoj Narula v. Union of India, 2014 (9) SCC 1

7. International obligations under CEDAW relating to Gender Justice

8. Sri Adi Visheshwara of Kashi Vishwanath Temple, Varanasi v. State of UP, 1997 (4) SCC 606

9. A S Narayana Deekshitulu v. State of AP 1996 (9) SCC 548

10. Sastri Yagnapurushadji and Ors. v. Muldas Bhudardas Vaishya and Anr, 1966 3 SCR 242/ AIR 1966 SC

1119: Paras: 33, 35-38, 40-41

11. Bhimsaya & Ors. v. Janabi (Smt) Alias Janawwa, (2006) 13 SCC 627 in Paras 13, 21-26

12. S. Mahendran v. The Secretary, Travancore Devasom Board (AIR 1993 Ker 42 / O.P No. 9015 of 1990-S
decided on 05.04.1991)
13. Charu Khurana v. Union of India, 2015 (1) SCC 192

14. S. Mahendran v. Secretary, Travancore Devasom Board, Kerala HC

15. State of Tamil Nadu v. State of Kerala (2014) 12 SCC 696, at Pg. 788

16. Commissioner Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras v. Sri Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar of Sri Shirur

Mutt
RESPONDENT‟S MEMORIAL
Page 8 of 18
 LOKMANYA TILAK LAW COLLEGE, PUNE FIFTH STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

Reference Materials
Books

(1) The Constitution of India, Gopal Sankarnarayanan, 11th Edition, 2018

(2) Indian Constitutional Law, M. P. Jain, 8th Edition, 2012.

Bare Acts

(1) The Constitution of India

(2) The Indian Penal Code, 1860

(3) The Criminal Procedure Code, 1973

(4) The other relevant International Instruments on Women are:

(i) Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948),

(ii) Convention on the Political Rights of Women (1952),

(iii) International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966),

(iv) International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966),

(v) Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (1967),

(vi) Declaration on the Protection of Women and Children in Emergency and Armed Conflict (1974),

(vii) Inter-American Convention for the Prevention, Punishment and Elimination of Violence against
Women (1995),
(viii) Universal Declaration on Democracy (1997),

(ix) Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women
(1999).

(x) Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 (PCRA)

Websites

(1) www.scconline.com (2)www.thelegalhighness.com (3)www.lawnotes.in

RESPONDENT‟S MEMORIAL
Page 9 of 18
 LOKMANYA TILAK LAW COLLEGE, PUNE FIFTH STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

Statement of Jurisdiction
It is humbly submitted that, the Appellent has appeared before this Hon‟ble Supreme Court for the

Writ Petition preferred under Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of directions against the
Govt. of Serela, Devappa Devasom Board to ensure entry of female devotees between the age group of
10 to 50 years to Lord Devappa Temple at Serela on the grounds of Customs/ Traditions; and to declare Rule
3(b) of the 1965 Rules as unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 15, 17, 21, 25, 26, 51A (e). Article 32
of the Constitution gives an extensive original jurisdiction to the Supreme Court in regard to
enforcement of Fundamental Rights. It is empowered to issue directions, orders or writs, including writs in
the nature of Mandamus to enforce them.

RESPONDENT‟S MEMORIAL
Page 10 of 18
 LOKMANYA TILAK LAW COLLEGE, PUNE FIFTH STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH:-

Facts of the case

• Karimala Temple, the abode of Swami Devappa, is one of the most famous and visited temples in the
State of Serela. It is administered and managed by Devappa Devasom Board (DDB).
• The temple is governed by the Serela Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorization of Entry) Act 1965
which authorizes the temple administration to frame rules regarding the administration of the temple.
• Lord Devappa is believed to be an eternal celibate (Naishtik Bramhachari) and hence as per the custom,
women of menstruating age are not allowed to visit the temple.
• Rule 3(b) of the Serela Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorization of Entry) Rules 1965 authorizes the
exclusion of Women of menstruating age (10 years to 50 years) from visiting the temple.
• Aggrieved by the said rule some public spirited citizens filed a Public Interest Litigation in the Serela High
Court challenging the said rule as discriminatory and hence in violation of Articles 14, 15, 17, and 25. The
Devappa Devasom Board contended that the priests have the final authority to decide upon these matters as
it is a religious denomination and has rights 10 manage its own matters.
• The Serela High Court upheld the said rule and thus the exclusion of Women from visiting the temple as
constitutional and justified, as it was a long standing custom prevailing since time immemorial.
• Aggrieved by the High Court's decision. An appeal is preferred before this Apex court.

RESPONDENT‟S MEMORIAL
 LOKMANYA TILAK LAW COLLEGE, PUNE FIFTH STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

Questions of Law

1. Whether Rule 3(b) of The Serela Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Rules which
authorises any religious denomination the exclusion of woman violates 14, 15(3) of the Constitution of
India?

NO. The rule 3(b) of the Serela Hindu Places of Public Worship Act (Authorisation of Entry) Rules
are constitutionally enacted by State legislature and came into force since 1965.

2. a. Whether exclusion of woman at Public places of worship is an essential practice of religion?

YES, exclusion of woman at Public places of worship is an essential practice of religion.

b. Does it violate Article 25, 26?

NO. The article starts with the phrase “Subject to public order, morality and health and
other provisions of this part”, which ensures that the article is not absolute, but with
reasonable restrictions.

3. Whether the exclusionary practice based on the biological factor regarding menstruation of women
violates Article 14, 15, 17, 21?

NO. This is NOT a CLASS LEGISLATION like banning the female gender as whole from entry, but
sort of reasonable restrictions.

4. Whether it is protected by morality used in Article 25, 26 of the Constitution of India?

YES. The customary traditions all over State are diverse in nature and protected by letter
and spirit of Article 25 and 26.
 LOKMANYA TILAK LAW COLLEGE, PUNE FIFTH STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

Grounds
Issue 1: Whether Rule 3(b) of The Serela Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry)
Rules which authorises any religious denomination the exclusion of woman violates 14, 15(3) of the
Constitution of India?

NO. The rule 3(b) of The Serela Hindu Places of Public Worship Act (Authorization of
Entry) Rules are constitutionally enacted by State legislature and came into force since 1965.

Firstly, the Act containing said rules had been passed by the legislature by adopting all constitutionally laid
down procedures in 1965 and since last 54 years is being followed.

Article 14 of the Constitution of India, does not deny any person equality before law and equal protection of
law. At the same time, reasonable classification which is rational is said to be justifiable. There are
two conditions laid down by this Hon‟ble Court in R. K. Garg vs. Union of India, [(1981) 4 SCC 675], that
are required to be fulfilled for rational classification. These are follows:-

1. That the classification must be founded on an intelligible differentia which distinguishes those that are
grouped together from others.
2. That the differentia must have a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the Act.
Considering above conditions, at Karimala abode where only girl child (up to age 10)
and mature women (over 50 years of age) are allowed as per the said Act.
On this count of the laid down condition, the classification of female gender is based on her
characteristic features of age, viz. girl child, adult and mature woman. The class of girl child and the
mature woman are visiting the abode and it amply proves that women on the basis of just
female gender were and are still not prohibited from offerings at sanctum sanctorum.
The women of age when they can procreate are temporarily persuaded to hold on till
they pass the said years and again, they are welcome at the abode. It is not like, no woman has ever
gone there and there is gender discrimination. The girl child who has visited the abode very well
knows that once her social and biological obligations regarding procreation and propagation are over,
she can head towards her spiritual goal after menopause. In fact, she continues to visit the abode in
this age group through proxies of her daughters and mothers, which she herself had done in the past
and will be doing in future, respectively.
The rationale behind the entry allowancing of only girl child and mature women are very
well documented.
 LOKMANYA TILAK LAW COLLEGE, PUNE FIFTH STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

The presiding deity of Karimala Temple is Swami Devappa, who is a sworn celibate of Naishtik
nature. The term “Naishtik” has no exact translation in English language, but the closest meaning is of
“TOTAL and UNCONDITIONAL ALLEGIENCE”.
Once this fact is accepted, the fact that the deity wishes to see only girl child (in the garb
of his daughters) and mature women (in the garb of his mother‟s) has a rationale, which the
State Government Act of 1965 sought to achieve.
Again in East Coast railway vs. Mahadev Appa Rao (2010) 7 SCC 678: (2010) 2 SCC (L&S)
483, the Hon‟ble Court held that the while contemplating on Article 14, and defining arbitrariness
clearly stress that application of mind and disclosure of mind by recording reasons that led
the authority to pass the order in question.
Here, while enacting the rules for Authorization of entry the authorities, i. e. The Devasom BOARD
AS WELL AS THE STATE GOVERNMENT have laid down the reasons, with clear application of
mind and recording the reasons.
Again there is no arbitrariness in this Act as it honours and respects the unbroken, age-old tradition
and custom usage and there is no gender discrimination, but a reasonable restriction.
Article 15 states that the State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of
religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.
Here, in the case under consideration, the female gender is not discriminated on any of the
above considerations; it is amply proved by the girl child and women devotees that visit the abode.
The reasonable restriction is of age specifications.
Article 15(3) states that nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any
special provision for women and children.
The prevailing diverse customs of the State are so vivid, that actually there is no need for the State to
make any special provisions for women and children.
In the matters of religion, the NON RELIGIOUS players, or, who are not devotees
themselves who by shedding crocodile tears for the silent majority and tradition following devotees,
use the judiciary‟s time and intelligence to forward their individual adventures and mala fide
intentions should be taken to task.

The devotees seeking the blessings are not fighting with the Deity, but offering themselves
humbly before the deity to attain worldly or spiritual blessings.

These matters of faith and religion which should be best left to the temples and
trusts, as rightly stated by Hon. Indu Malhotra, J.in her dissenting note in the verdict of Karimala
case. It will
 LOKMANYA TILAK LAW COLLEGE, PUNE FIFTH STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

open up to whole Pandora‟s Box. Her prudent and sane opinion, though in a minority carries weight.
But if that opinion is superseded by the democratically accepted maxim of “Majority carries
the verdict”, by „Four-to-one majority‟ then, the same principle should be applied and the
silent and prudent wishes of the society in general, and Serelite womenfolk in particular should be
respected and upheld over the adventurous and publicity seeking PIL appellants.

The Article 13 of the Constitution of India is not applicable in this case as the Rules by the
Board and the State are proposed, discussed ,passed and came into force since 1965.

Issue 2: Whether exclusion of woman at Public places of worship is an essential practice of religion?
Does it violate Article 25, 26?

YES, exclusion of woman at Public places of worship is an essential practice of religion.

Art. 25 of Constitution of India describes the Fundamental Right to religion to freely profess, practice and
propagate religion, subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this part. The
Practice at Karimala Temple is neither contrary to this article nor disturbs public order, morality, and health.

It is stated in Art. 26 - Freedom to manage religious affairs, again subject to public order, morality
and health. The Devasom Board is functioning perfectly within the ambit of this article.

There are some religious practices where men are not allowed.

To each his/her own. No discrimination or gender inequality biases are supposed when it comes to praying to
God.

God or ultimate solace is to be achieved through total surrender, not by garrulous behaviour, is the
cornerstone of the religion, be it may any.

The Karimala Temple is not unique, in a sense that there are many temples and places of worship
which have their own rules and traditions to follow.

Some are for MEN only and some are for FEMALE only. Both gender respected and followed the
traditions while fully enjoying the Fundamental rights under Part III of the Constitution.

In Serela State itself, there are at least two temples where MEN, yes, MEN are not allowed.

1. The Attukal Bhagavathy Temple,

 LOKMANYA TILAK LAW COLLEGE, PUNE FIFTH STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

A temple located in Kerala that worships women, has made it to the Guinness Book of World
Records for hosting the Pongal festival which sees around three million women participate. Men
are not allowed to enter the temple that sees the largest gathering of women during the festival.

2. Chakkulathukavu Temple:
Another temple located in Kerala that worships Goddess Bhagavathi and observes an
annual
ritual called „Naari Puja„ in which the male priest washes the feet of women devotees fasting for
10 days on the first Friday of December. The day is called Dhanu. During „Naari Puja„,
only
women are allowed to enter the temple.
Then there are many other temples spread all over India, in both northern and southern
parts, which follow peculiar traditions.
3 Bhagavathi Maa Temple:
This temple, located in Kanyakumari, worships Kanya Maa Bhagawati Durga who is said to
have gone to an isolated area in the middle of the ocean for Tapasya so that she could ask for Lord
Shiva as her husband.
According to the Puranas, the spine of a Sati fell on the shrine. The goddess is also known as
the Goddess of Sanyasa.
Due to these reasons, sanyasi men are allowed till the gate of the temple, while married men
are prohibited from entering the premises.
6. Mata Temple:
During a particular period, men are strictly prohibited to enter this temple located in Muzaffarpur in
Bihar. The rules are so strict that even a male priest is not allowed to enter the premises. Only women
are allowed to enter this temple during that particular period.
7. Tryambakeshwar Temple, Nasik, Maharashtra:
Women were not allowed to enter the inner sanctum of this temple devoted to Lord Shiva till 2016.
Following which the Bombay High Court passed an order saying that even men shouldn‟t
be allowed to enter the inner sanctum if women are not allowed. Since then, men have also been
barred from entering to maintain gender equality.
No prudent devotee and citizen objected this on the basis of Article 14 or 15, but respected
and honoured the time tested traditions.

Issue 3: Whether the exclusionary practice based on the biological factor regarding menstruation of
women violates Article 14, 15, 17, 21?
 LOKMANYA TILAK LAW COLLEGE, PUNE FIFTH STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

NO. This is NOT a CLASS LEGISLATION like banning the female gender as whole from entry, but
sort of reasonable restrictions.

It is medically accepted fact that biological factors are considered when there are strenuous
biological activities are concerned. Like mountaineering, adventure sports etc. If the instructions are not
followed, the harm will be of the offender.

In religious matters, the menstruation is a taboo subject, because the draining out of blood leaves the woman
a bit weaker and prone to diseases. This has been proven by medical research and findings. To give
her much needed rest to recoup the loss of vigour, was the purpose of the exclusion of the said woman from
daily chores of the household.

Religious prayers and temple going is a maritime activity and as such, everybody who is unclean and not
sober, irrespective of gender is not supposed to visit the abodes of God. Except some miscreants, this age-old
custom of self- abiding restrictions is followed, honoured and revered with a common sense and prudence
and is in perfect consonance with the spirit of fundamental rights bestowed under art 14, 15, 17 and 25 and
26.

The said rights are not absolute, as stated by the Supreme Court time and again, but come with the prudence
and reasonable restrictions.

Issue 4: Whether it is protected by morality used in Article 25, 26 of the Constitution of India?

YES. The customary traditions all over state are diverse in nature and protected by letter and spirit
of Article 25 and 26.

As stated above with numerous examples of religious institutions all over India, where diversity
of customs, traditions and usage is followed with equal respect for both genders, there is no
question of gender discrimination. Religion is about following set rules without questioning. Those do not
follow are free to renounce it. The Constitution has given freedom to profess any religion. But this should
not be taken as a spade of Kid George Washington and start failing trees, left, right and centre. The rights
are for those who are very well aware of the consequences arising out of both situations, by following and
by not following.
 LOKMANYA TILAK LAW COLLEGE, PUNE FIFTH STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

The Judiciary and the legislature can‟t be Ivory tower institutions, insulated from the ground realities and
cultural ethos of the society. The executive branch of the government which is the real body
who implements the whips and whims of the two arms of the government is stretched to the limit. The law
and order situation following the verdict and the State Government‟s purposeful attempt to sneeze
in the women was costing the State exchequer very dear, which was just crawling out of the situation
havocked by nature‟s fury, earlier in the year.

PRAYERS
In light of the questions presented, issues raised, arguments advanced and the authorities cited, counsel for
the Respondents most humbly prays that: -

A. Dismiss the said petition with exemplary costs imposed on the Appellent.
B. Declare and upheld the Constitutional Validity of the Serela Hindu Places of Public
Worship
[Authorisation of Entry] Act, 1965 and the rules made thereunder.
C. Issues directions for eliminating the malpractice that the current and on-going movement of entry
to female only for earning publicity stunt.
D. Pass any such directions or order which this Hon'ble court deems fit and proper in the facts
and circumstances of the above mentioned case.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS THE RESPONDENTS ARE DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER
PRAY.

Respectfully submitted,
Through

Mr. Vakil
ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT(S)
Dated: 23/2/2019
Place: New Delhi