-Seafield Sri Maha Maraimman Temple, Press statement issued by MPs R. Sivarasa and Charles Santiago, December 18, 2017.

As a group of NGOs called the Seafield Task Force has raised concerns about the status of the Seafield Sri Maha Mariamman Temple in USJ 25, Puchong.  both of us, YB Sivarasa Rasiah, Member of Parliament for Subang ( Keadilan ) and YB Charles Santiago, Member of Parliament for Klang ( DAP), met with a delegation led by Shri Ramaji representing the Taskforce on Thursday, 14 December to discuss their concerns.

In June this year the Seafield temple faced a court action to evict it from its current site initiated by the owner and developer of the temple land One City Development Sdn. Bhd.  Dato’ Seri Azmin Ali, Menteri Besar Selangor, had intervened then to stop the demolition of the temple.

The Taskforce delegation updated us that a recent court action to challenge the possession order obtained by the developer was initiated by Mr M. Nagaraju, one of the persons claiming the right to administer the temple. This court action was dismissed in late October 2017.  The Taskforce was concerned that a solution had to be found to ensure that the temple was able to continue to remain at its current site.

Based on the facts established in the course of the discussion and other inputs, it was clear that there were some key legal obstacles that had to be resolved in order to find a long term solution for the temple.

Firstly, the land occupied by the temple is private land in the name of One City Development Sdn. Bhd. The owner has also obtained a court order to regain possession of the land. Therefore any long-term solution needs their agreement and support.

Secondly, the right to possession and management of the temple and to make all decisions regarding it has been disputed between two groups from 2001. One group is led by Mr K. Chellappa who initiated a court action in 1996 to stop an eviction by the previous owners Sime UEP. In 2001 Mr Chellappa took a court action against another group led by Mr M Nagaraju to resolve who was the group with legal authority over the temple. In July 2014, Mr Chellappa succeeded in getting a court order from the Shah Alam HIgh Court that he had legal authority over the temple – Mr Nagaraju did not appeal against that order.

All the relevant parties including the developer, the two disputing groups and the State Government had also entered into a consent order prior to this in March 2014 for  the relocation of the temple to two different plots of land named as Land A ( a piece about 10,000 square ft size and adjacent to the current temple land ) and Land B  ( a one acre site at Putra Heights ).

Mr K Chellappa and his committee then using the legal authority given by the court order of August 2014 then agreed to give up Land A back to the developer in  return for a donation of one million ringgit to the temple. Pursuant to the March 2014 court order, the developer then surrendered a one acre plot as Land B at Putra Heights for the relocation of the Mariamman temple. Mr Chellappa’s group has built a temporary temple “baalastaabanam” at Land B in Putra Heights with the developers funds but the temple is still not functioning as the deities remain on the existing site.

We are informed that the developer has also allocated another one acre site at Putra Heights adjacent to the proposed Mariamman temple and also funds for the relocation of a Kaliamman temple from its existing site next to the original Seafield temple. The Kaliamman temple has been built and is functioning currently. The developer has also allocated a three quarter acre site for a carpark to be shared between the two temples at Putra Heights.

[Ramaj of ]The Taskforce also informed us that they are now claiming the right to possess and administer the current temple in its existing site. They say that the current temple should be maintained there based on its long history as an estate temple.  They also say they do not recognize the claims by either Mr Chellappa or Mr Nagaraju to administer the temple.  However this claim by the Taskforce will also have to contend with the court orders that Mr Chellappa  has obtained and the fact that Mr Nagaraju was a party to some court actions and also initiated the most recent court action against the developer.  In our view, it would appear that any long-term solution to the continued existence of this temple should also have the support of Mr Chellappa’s group in the light of the court orders in his favour.

We would urge all parties and relevant stakeholders in particular the two groups who are claiming the right to make decisions over the temple as well as the Taskforce to engage in dialogue with one another in order to find an amicable solution.

We are referring this matter to Menteri Besar Dato’ Seri Azmin Ali who has assured us he is committed to help find a harmonious solution acceptable to all stakeholders. He will assist to bring all parties and relevant stakeholders to the discussion table.