The Public Library Protection ... vs The State Of Kerala Represented By ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 3867 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                    PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR

                                         &

                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

       WEDNESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 14TH MAGHA,1942

                            WP(C).No.5816 OF 2014(S)

PETITIONER:

                THE PUBLIC LIBRARY PROTECTION COUNCIL
                REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY,
                ATTUKAL SURENDRAN, ROHINI NIVAS, TC 22/1062,
                MANAKKADU P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

                BY ADV. SRI.P.SATHISAN
RESPONDENTS:

       1        THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
                REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, EDUCATION
                DEPARTMENT.

       2        THE ART HERITAGE COMMISSION, THIRUVANATHAPURAM.

       3        THE STATE CENTRAL LIBRARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

       4        SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION,
                THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

       5        LIBRARIAN, STATE CENTRAL LIBRARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

       6        GOVERNMENT ADDITIONAL SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT,
                THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

       7        PRESIDENT, C.V.RAMAN PILLAI FOUNDATION,
                THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

                R1 - R6 ADV.SRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE, SR.G.P.
                R7 BY ADV. SRI.SAIJO HASSAN
                R1, R7 BY ADV. SRI.BENOJ C AUGUSTIN
                R BY ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN
                R BY ADV. SRI.VISHNU BHUVANENDRAN

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03-02-2021, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.5816 OF 2014(S)
                                        :: 2 ::




                                    JUDGMENT

Dated this the 3rd day of February 2021

S.MANIKUMAR, C.J.

Petitioner/the Public Library Protection Council is a charitable

society registered under Kerala Charitable and Literary Societies

Registration Act. This writ petition is filed seeking preservation of the

building and premises of State Central Library, Trivandrum, maintaining

the heritage and monumental value of the same. It is submitted by

learned counsel for the petitioner that by Ext.P2 order dated 3.8.2010 in

W.P.(C)No.37574/2009, an Hon'ble Division Bench of this court directed

to maintain status quo with respect to constructions in the premises of

State Central Library. According to the petitioner, at present there is

one big statute in front of the complex and yet another statue is also

permitted as per Ext.P3 and there are demands for installing numerous

other statutes as well in the premises. Grievance of the petitioner in this

writ petition is that if the statutes, which are sought to be installed, are

effected the same shall destroy the very heritage, beauty and value of the

200 year old library complex. Hence this writ petition is filed with the

following reliefs:

WP(C).No.5816 OF 2014(S) :: 3 ::

i) issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ or direction directing respondents 1 to 4 to ensure that no statutes or other constructions are put up or effected in the premises of State Central Library, Thiruvananthapuram and over the land adjacent to and surrounding the library building.

ii) issue a writ of certiorari or such other writ or direction calling for entire records leading upto Exhibit P3 and quash the same as improper and illegal.

Iii) to direct respondents 1 to 4 to take necessary steps to preserve the library building and the adjacent property as heritage premises and to put the same under the control of 2 nd respondent as well with respect to any constructions therein after enlisting and grading the same as a heritage building.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials

available on record.

3. It is to be noted that during the pendency of this writ petition,

W.P.(C)No.37574 of 2009 has attained finality. By a common judgment

dated 18.11.2015 in W.P.(C)No.37574/2009 and W.A.No.288/2013, this

court passed the following directions:

14. It is stated that though steps were taken for measurement of the property in metes and bounds, the property has not been assigned in favour of the Library Council. Therefore, no specific right could have been claimed by the Library Council as far as the right to property is concerned. It might be true that they have proceeded with certain expenditure for preparation of plan and to proceed with the project. But the fact remains that no construction has been made in the property other than laying the foundation stone.

WP(C).No.5816 OF 2014(S) :: 4 ::

15. In the counter affidavit, it has been stated that Ext.P1 was issued by way of a mistake. Though it is not pointed out, under what circumstances the mistake has occurred, still, by considering the fact that no right had accrued to the Library Council, they cannot claim any legal right to remain in possession of the property nor can they seek enforcement of Ext.P1. Hence they do not have any legal right to direct the Government to grant them right over the property.

16. But before cancelling Ext.P1, as rightly observed by the learned single Judge, the Library Council ought to have been heard. Hence P3 is therefore clearly in violation of the principles of natural justice. But having said so, the learned Single Judge ought to have directed the matter to be decided afresh after notice to the Library Council. As already stated, no assignment has been made pursuant to Ext.P1 order. Hence the direction of the learned Single Judge permitting the petitioner to proceed with the construction was unwarranted and unjustified. To that extent, we are interfering with the judgment of the learned Single Judge.

Under such circumstances, the writ appeal is partly allowed as follows:

(i) Quashing of Ext.P3 is confirmed.

(ii) The direction of the learned Single Judge permitting the petitioner to proceed with the project and complete the construction in terms with Ext.P1 is set aside.

(iii) Government's right to proceed further after notice to the Library Council is reserved.

(iv) No directions are required in W.P.(C)No.37574 of 2009, but they should also be heard before any decision is taken by the Government in the matter."

4. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 7 th

respondent/President, C.V.Raman Pillai Foundation,

Thiruvananthapuram wherein, it is stated that the allegation of the WP(C).No.5816 OF 2014(S) :: 5 ::

petitioner that erecting the statue is against the very stand of the

Government to preserve the library premises, is without any basis and

untenable. The sanctions for the fund and for putting up the statue were

given by the Government only in accordance with the guidelines issued

by the Government in this regard.

"14. Exhibit P1 pictures of the library premises do not give a correct and realistic picture of the premises. The statue of the poet Ulloor is erected in a garden close to the Main Road and away from the library building. The statue situates very close to the main entry gate to the library compound from the Main Road. The distance between the statue and the library building is approximately 10 meters. In between the statue and the library building there is a wide road and a garden. The proposal to erect the statue of C.V. Raman Pillai is on the other side of the statue of Ulloor. Both the statues will be symmetrical on both sides of the Main Entrance to the library, and this will add to the architectural beauty.

15. The allegation of the petitioner in paragraph 8 that the attempt is to convert the public library as a library of statues, is mischievous and a misguided apprehension. The allegation of the petitioner that the attempt to erect the statue is by persons with vested interest, is baseless, ill-motivated and actuated by malafides. The allegation of the petitioner that erecting the statue is against the very stand of the Government to preserve the library premises, is without any basis and untenable.

16. It is only reasonable to question the bonafides of the petitioner and his pointed opposition against erecting the statue of C.V. Raman Pillai. The only statue which is set up in the library compound is that of the renowned Malayalam poet Ulloor. The present proposal is to put up the statue of C.V.

Raman Pillai, who is undoubtedly the doyen of the Malayalam Novel literature past and present. It is only in the fitness of WP(C).No.5816 OF 2014(S) :: 6 ::

things that the statue of literary icon C.V. Raman Pillai is erected by the side of the great Malayalam poet Ulloor which will add to the literary value of the place.

17. With regard to the contentions of the petitioner in ground 1, it is apparently evident that there is no intention for a new construction in the property or any alteration or modification to the present layout. For preserving the heritage of the library, which is a temple of learning and knowledge, a statue of C.V. Raman Pillai, on whom the title of "Sahitya Kusala" was conferred by the Maharaja of Kochi, will add to its heritage value, especially when, it is put up by the side of the statue of the poet laureate. It will only add to the grace and beauty of the library premises.

18. The contentions of the petitioner in ground 2 are baseless and devoid of any merit. The Government of Kerala, in appreciation of the request made by the C.V. Raman Pillai National Foundation, had sanctioned an amount of Rs. 10 lakhs for the construction and erection of the statue.

19. The contentions of the petitioner in ground 3 of the Writ Petition are untenable since the Government of Kerala had considered all aspects before granting permission for erecting the statue in the Public library compound and also in granting the fund of Rs. 10 lakhs. C.V. Raman Pillai was born in 1858 and died in 1922. He was not a member of any political party, nor did he form any political or religious forum. It is, therefore, wild to allege that the sanction to put the statue was given out of political considerations or for the benefit of any politically interested group. The sanctions for the fund and for putting up the statue were given by the Government only in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Government in this regard.

20. The contentions of the petitioner in ground 4 are totally mischievous, baseless and untenable. The erection of the statue of C.V. Raman Pillai in the library compound which is at a distance of nearly 10 meters from the library building, will only add to the pomp and grandeur of the library building." WP(C).No.5816 OF 2014(S) :: 7 ::

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case in

particular, the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the 7 th respondent, we

are of the view that interference of this court is not necessary in this

case. We find no merit in the writ petition. Writ petition fails and its

accordingly dismissed.

sd/-

S.MANIKUMAR CHIEF JUSTICE

sd/-

SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE jes WP(C).No.5816 OF 2014(S) :: 8 ::

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE PICTURE OF LIBRARY PREMISES SHOWING ITS HERITAGE BEAUTY.

EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE ORDER OF HIGH COURT IN WPC 37574/09 DATED 03.08.10.

EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE KERALA GOVERNMENT DATED 29.11.13.

EXHIBIT P3(a) COPY OF THE TRANSLATION TO EXHIBIT P3.

EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE HONOURABLE CHIEF MINISTER AND OTHER RELEVANT AUTHORITIES TO PRESERVE THE ORIGINAL HERITAGE NATURE OF THE ORIGINAL PREMISES.

EXHIBIT P4(a) COPY OF THE TRANSLATION TO EXHIBIT P4.

// TRUE COPY //

P.S. TO JUDGE