Observing that temple money belonged to the deity and cannot be used to enrich and ensure survival of financially distressed cooperative banks, the Supreme Court on Friday rejected the petitions filed by some cooperative banks in Kerala challenging the HC direction to return the deposits to the Thirunelly Temple Devaswom.
"You want to use the temple money to save the bank? What is wrong with directing that the temple money, instead of being in a cooperative bank which is breathing with great difficulty, should go to a healthy nationalised bank that can give maximum interest," said a two-judge bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant and including Justice Joymalya Bagchi.
The top court made these scathing observations after hearing a batch of appeals filed by the cooperative banks challenging the order of the Kerala HC asking them to return the deposits to the Thirunelly Temple Devaswom.
During the course of the hearing on Friday, the bench asked what was wrong with the HC's direction. To this, advocate Manu Krishnan, the counsel for the petitioners (banks), replied that the "abrupt" direction issued by the HC to return the deposits within two months was causing difficulties.
But the top court was not inclined to grant any relief to these cooperative banks and rejected their appeals.
"Temple money, first of all, belongs to the deity. So therefore, this money has to be saved, protected and utilised only for the interests of the temple. It can't become a source of income or survival for a cooperative bank," observed the CJI.
The top court went on to add that you (banks) should establish your credibility among the people. "If you are unable to attract the customers and deposits, that is your problem," the CJI pointed out.
The bench eventually rejected the pleas, but granted liberty to the petitioners to approach the HC seeking an extension of time.
The appeals in the apex court were filed by Manathnawady Co-operative Urban Society Ltd and Thirunelly Service Cooperative Bank Ltd, challenging the judgment passed by a division bench of the HC in August.
The Thirunelly Devaswom had earlier approached the HC aggrieved by the refusal of the co-operative banks to repay the fixed deposits in spite of repeated requests.
When Justice Bagchi said the banks were supposed to immediately release the amounts when the deposits matured, the lawyer appearing for the banks replied, "We have been providing them services as per their needs. We have also started a special branch in their premises as per request. They have been consistently renewing the FDs."