Minister for Devaswoms V N Vasavan once again told the Assembly on Wednesday, March 12, that the government wanted the person appointed by the Devaswom Recruitment Board to function as ‘kazhagam’ at the Koodalmanikyam Temple at Irinjalakkuda, Thrissur.
The candidate directly recruited as ‘kazhagam’, Balu B A, was temporarily redesignated as ‘office attendant’ on March 6 after the ‘thanthris’ of the temple objected to his selection and threatened to boycott the deity installation ceremony on March 9. He joined duty late last month, on February 24.
The six ‘thanthri’ families associated with the Koodalmanikyam Temple want the ‘kazhagam’ selection to be left to them. They also want the post reserved exclusively for the ‘thekke varrieth’ community. Balu belongs to the Ezhava community, and it is for the time that an Ezhava has been given ‘kazhagam’ duties at Koodalmanikyam.
“The Koodalmanikyam Devaswom chairman himself has taken a firm stand against this,” the minister told the Assembly. He was responding to a Submission moved by Congress MLA A P Anil Kumar on the issue.
“A case should have been registered for violating Article 17 of the Constitution, which forbade untouchability in any form,” Anil Kumar said. “Instead of taking action against the ‘thantris’ for giving a complaint that was blatantly unconstitutional, what the devaswom did was to remove a person from his job on the basis of this complaint,” he said.
Vasavan, however, refused to pin the blame on the Devaswom. “It was not the Board that made him OA (office attendant) but the administrator. The Department has been asked to take necessary action,” the minister said.
However, it is still not clear whether Balu would be reinstated as ‘kazhagam.’ (A ‘kazhagam’ worker’s primary duty is to make flower garlands for the deity). “Balu has gone on leave, and he will return only on Sunday (March 16),” Sree Koodalmanikyam Devaswom chairman C K Gopi told Onmanorama.
“The management committee will take an appropriate decision once he returns,” Gopi said. A representative of the ‘thantri’ families is also in the management committee. Informal discussions are going on with the ‘thanthri’ families.
The devaswom minister said that under Section 4 of the Koodalmanickam Devaswom Employees Regulations 2003, there are two ‘kazhagam’ posts at the temple. One is hereditary, and it will be taken up by a person the ‘thantris’ consider suitable. The salary scale for the hereditary post, as per the 2003 Regulations, is Rs 1205 plus DA.
The second ‘kazhagam’ post is direct recruitment, done through the Devaswom recruitment Board. The qualification is previous experience as ‘kazhagam’ in any temple under the Kochi and Thiruvathamcore devaswom boards, and Guruvayur devaswom; Rs 1300-1850 is the salary scale.
At present, the minister said the ‘hereditary’ ‘kazhagam’ post is vacant at the temple. “The administrator manages the functions of the ‘hereditary’ kazhagam by appointing contract employees, and on the basis of the instructions handed down by thanthris,” the minister said.
Fact is, Koodalmanikyam temple has long before limited its ‘kazhagam’ posts to one. “There are still the ‘hereditary’ post and the direct recruitment. But the hereditary ‘kazhagam will work only for two months a year. For the remaining 10 months, the ‘kazhagam’ functions will be carried out by the direct recruitee,” the devaswom chairman said.
Nonetheless, the ‘hereditary’ ‘kazhagam’ will be paid a monthly allowance of Rs 2000 for all the 10 months he would not be working. Gopi also said that the salary of the ‘hereditary’ ‘kazhagam’ is not Rs 1025 as the minister said but that it had been recently raised to Rs 2000.
Curiously, for the last four years ‘kazhagam’ duties at the temple were done by a contract employee. “He belonged to the ‘Pisharody’ community. The ‘thekke varrieth’ community, I understand, has for various reasons like economic prosperity has relinquished their claim on their traditional occupation. Or else why would we have to obtain the services of a contract employee,” Gopi said.
The devaswom chairman also defended the administrator’s move to temporarily remove Balu to another post. “If the administrator had not done it, the deity installation ceremony on March 9 would not have perhaps taken place,” Gopi said.
He said that the ‘thantri’ families submitted a complaint on March 6, “just four hours before the cleansing ritual as part of the installation was to begin”. “We immediately called a meeting, and heard them. We categorically told them that we can go only by the law.
“We asked them to approach the court or the government or the Devaswom Recruitment Board, and in the meantime to cooperate. But they stuck to their stand, said they would not lead the installation ceremony,” Gopi said.
It was at this point that the administrator, using her discretionary power, temporarily redesignated Balu as office attendant.