Kerala High Court
Prasannakumar.D vs The District Collector on 25 October, 2024
1
W.P(C) Nos.23101 of 2024
and 36780 of 2024
2024:KER:79766
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISANKAR V. MENON
FRIDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 36780 OF 2024
PETITIONER/S:
1 PRASANNAKUMAR.D.
AGED 57 YEARS
S/O.DIVAKARAN, RESIDING AT PALATHUNDIL, EDAKKADU P.O.,
KOLLAM, PIN - 691552
2 PORUVAZHY PERUVIRUTHI MALANADA DEVASWOM,
AGED 57 YEARS
EDAKKADU POST, KOLLAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
PRASANNAKUMAR D, S/O.DIVAKARAN, RESIDING AT PALATHUNDIL,
EDAKKADU P.O., KOLLAM., PIN - 691552
BY ADVS.
B.KRISHNA MANI
N.V.SANDHYA
DHANUJA M.S
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
CIVIL STATION, COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM., PIN - 691013
2 THE SUB COLLECTOR AND SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE,
COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM,, PIN - 691013
3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM., PIN - 691013
4 THE TAHSILDAR,
2
W.P(C) Nos.23101 of 2024
and 36780 of 2024
2024:KER:79766
TALUK OFFICE, KUNNATHUR KOLLAM., PIN - 690540
5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
PORUVAZHY VILLAGE, KOLLAM ., PIN - 690540
6 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
SOORANADU POLICE STATION, SOORANADU, KOLLAM., PIN -
690522
7 SUJEESH,
FEMINA BHAVAN, EDAKKADU P.O. KOLLAM.(SECRETARY),
KADUTHAMSSERY KUDUMBAYOGA TRUST, PORUVAZHY PERUVIRUTHY
MALANADA, ADIMOOLAM KADUTHAMSSERY KOTTARAM, MALANADA,
IDAKKAD P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT-, PIN - 691552
8 YAMUNADEVI,
AGED 59 YEARS
D/O.CHELLAMMA, YAMUNA BHAVAN, EDAKKADU P.O.,
KOLLAM(PRESIDENT) KADUTHAMSSERY KUDUMBAYOGA TRUST.
PORUVAZHY PERUVIRUTHY MALANADA, ADIMOOLAM KADUTHAMSSERY
KOTTARAM, MALANADA, IDAKKAD P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT., PIN
- 691522
BY ADVS.
SHIBU JOSEPH
SARATH VISWANATHAN(K/002594/2023)
P.VISWANATHAN (SR.)(K/000283/1986)
SRI.SUNIL KURIAKOSE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
25.10.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).23101/2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
3
W.P(C) Nos.23101 of 2024
and 36780 of 2024
2024:KER:79766
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISANKAR V. MENON
FRIDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 23101 OF 2024
PETITIONER/S:
1 RAJANEESH,
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O.RAVEENDRAN PILLAI, RESIDING AT THADATHIVILA
PADINJATTATHIL HOUSE, PANAPPETTY, PORUVAZHI VILLAGE,
KOLLAM-690520 SECRETARY, PORUVAZHY PERUVIRUTHI MALANADA
DEVASWAM, EDAKKADU POST, KOLLAM, PIN - 691552
2 PORUVAZHY PERUVIRUTHI MALANADA DEVASWAM,
AGED 38 YEARS
EDAKKADU POST, KOLLAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
RAJANEESH, S/O.RAVEENDRAN PILLAI, AGED 38 YEARS,
RESIDING AT THADATHIVILA PADINJATTATHIL HOUSE,
PANAPPETTY, PORUVAZHI VILLAGE, KOLLAM, PIN - 690520
BY ADVS.
B.KRISHNA MANI
N.V.SANDHYA
DHANUJA M.S
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM,, PIN - 691001
2 THE SUB COLLECTOR
& SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, KOLLAM1., PIN - 691001
4
W.P(C) Nos.23101 of 2024
and 36780 of 2024
2024:KER:79766
3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
KOLLAM., PIN - 691001
SRI.SUNIL KURIAKOSE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
25.10.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).36780/2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
5
W.P(C) Nos.23101 of 2024
and 36780 of 2024
2024:KER:79766
JUDGMENT
[WP(C) Nos.36780/2024, 23101/2024]
These connected writ petitions are filed by the Secretary and
Managing Committee of Poruvazhy Peruviruthi Malanada
Temple(Malanada Devaswom).
2. In W.P.(C)No.23101 of 2024, the petitioner points out that
Ext.P2 order under Section 145 of the Cr.P.C. has been issued by the
2nd respondent herein, prohibiting the conduct of elections, meetings
etc. in the property of the 2nd petitioner, Devaswom.
3. The learned counsel Sri. Krishnamani B., points out that
Ext.P2 has been issued on the basis of enquiry report by the Station
House Officer, Sooranadu, without serving a copy of the said report
and also without providing the details of the complainant, on whose
complaint the report was prepared leading to the issue of Ext.P2.
4. A detailed counter affidavit is filed by the 2nd respondent
herein. In the said counter affidavit, it is specifically pointed out that
there were certain disputes between the elected/nominated
and 36780 of 2024
2024:KER:79766
members of the Temple Trust committee and it is only because of
certain law and order apprehension, Ext.P2 was issued by the 2 nd
respondent with reference to the provisions of Section 145(4) and
(5) of Cr.P.C., that the petitioners can very well approach the 2 nd
respondent for varying Ext.P2, pointing out the present state of
affairs.
5. In writ petition No.36780 of 2024, the Secretary of the
Devaswom as the 1st petitioner, and the Devaswom as the 2nd
petitioner have sought for appropriate directions to respondents 1 to
6 to ensure that the functions mentioned in Exts.P8, P9 and P17 does
not take place and also to direct the 6th respondent to ensure
complete law and order is maintained in the Malanada Devaswam
and Upadevada temples.
6. I have heard Sri.Krishnamani B., the learned counsel for
the petitioners in these writ petitions, the learned Government
Pleader appearing for the official respondents and Sri.Viswanathan,
the learned Senior Counsel representing respondents 7 and 8 in
W.P.(C)No.36780 of 2024.
and 36780 of 2024
2024:KER:79766
7. With respect to the prayers in W.P(C) No.36780 of 2024,
Sri.Krishnamani B., the learned counsel for the petitioners, would
rely on the findings in Ext.P2 order of the Land Tribunal to contend
that respondents 7 and 8 have no right to interfere in the affairs of
the temple. With reference to Ext.P3 judgment, he would contend
that, one Sri. Sankaran Ayyappan had tried to get certain extent of
property in which the deity/temple was situated and that attempt
was not successful, as evidenced by the findings in Ext.P3. He also
points out that the said Sri. Sankaran Ayyappan was the
Ooralan/priest of the temple. With reference to a subsequent appeal
filed, the said appeal was also rejected as evidenced by Ext.P4.
Thereafter, he points out that, though a further appeal was preferred
before this Court, the same was settled between the parties as
evidenced by Ext.P5, wherein the legal heirs of the Ooralan were the
signatories. So he points out that Exts.P8 and P9 propose to carry
out the religious functions in the temple premises at the behest of
respondents 7 and 8, who have no role to play in the temple
administration when compared to the petitioners herein. Therefore,
and 36780 of 2024
2024:KER:79766
he prays that directions may be issued by the official respondents
to extend the appropriate protection.
8. Per contra, Sri.Viswanathan, the learned senior counsel
representing respondents 7 and 8 points out that the submissions
made on the part of the petitioners on the basis of Exts.P2, P3 and
P4 are not correct. He points out that the purchase certificate was
obtained with respect to 67 cents of property as evidenced by Ext.P2
from the Land Tribunal. He also say that, even when the purchase
certificate was issued as above, with respect to the said 67 cents of
property, the fact that the members of the Kadathamcherry family
were having a right to participate in the activities of the temple as
evidenced by Ext.P2 and the findings contained therein. He would
also make reference to Ext.P1 Udampadi produced by the petitioners,
to contend that even under the said Udampadi, reference is also to
be made to the earlier Udampadi which was modified by Ext.P1. With
reference to the earlier Udampadi which was so modified, a copy of
which was handed over at the time of hearing, the learned senior
counsel points out that the right of the afore family to participate in
and 36780 of 2024
2024:KER:79766
the religious activities are specifically established.
9. On the other hand, Sri.Sunil Kuriakose, the learned
Government Pleader, makes reference to the counter affidavit filed
in W.P.(C) No.23101 of 2024 and contends that a report has been
received as per which, there is a threat of law and order situation in
the locality. He therefore prayers that appropriate directions may be
issued to the Police Authorities to interfere, if there are any law and
order situations. He also points out that in the interest of both
parties as well as the devotees, the dispute between the petitioners
as well as respondents 7 and 8 are decided by the Sub-District
Magistrate at the earliest including the question as to whether the
function scheduled on 27.10.2024 is to be carried out as proposed.
10. I have considered the rival submissions as well as the
connected records.
11. As regards W.P(C) No.23101 of 2024, this Court notices
that the averments contained in the counter affidavit filed by the
respondents. In the counter affidavit, it has been specifically
recorded that the petitioners can very well approach the District
and 36780 of 2024
2024:KER:79766
Magistrate to show that no such dispute exists as in the earlier
instance, and they can seek for a modification of the orders passed
under Section 145(1) of the Cr.P.C.
12. In such circumstances, it would be for the petitioners in
WP(C) No.23101 of 2024 to file a proper representation with
reference to the provisions under Section 145(4) and (5) of Cr.P.C.,
before the 2nd respondent, within a period of one week from today.
If such an application is filed, the Sub Divisional Magistrate to take a
considered decision on that application as expeditiously as possible
within a period of two weeks thereafter. Needless to say, that the 2 nd
respondent is to extend an opportunity for hearing to all concerned
including the petitioners and respondents 7 and 8 in
W.P.(C)No.36780 of 2024.
13. As regards the prayers in WP(C) No.36780 of 2024, in my
opinion, on an evaluation of the rival contentions, it is quite clear
that the dispute is essentially a civil dispute. In such a situation, the
powers of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
cannot be exercised for resolving disputes between the petitioners
and 36780 of 2024
2024:KER:79766
and respondents 7 and 8. It is for the petitioners in W.P.(C)
No.36780 of 2024 to approach the competent civil court to get their
grievances redressed.
14. However, taking note of the submission made by Sri.Sunil,
the learned Government Pleader that there is a threat of law and
order situation, it will be in the interest of all concerned to have a
meeting at the instance of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate on
26.10.2024 at 11.00 a.m. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate to consider
the submissions to be made by the petitioners and respondents 7
and 8 and try to arrive at a conciliation between the parties to the
extent possible. Taking into account the submission made by the
learned Government Pleader that since the time available is very
short on account of which the availability of the Sub-Divisional
Magistrate on 26.10.2024, cannot be ensured, it is further clarified
that if the Sub-Divisional Magistrate is not available on 26.10.2024,
any other competent officer to be nominated by the said officer can
try to settle the disputes between the petitioners and respondents 7
and 8. The petitioners and respondents 7 and 8 (or their authorised
and 36780 of 2024
2024:KER:79766
representatives) to appear before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate at
11.00 a.m. on 26.10.2024.
The writ petitions are disposed of as above.
Sd/-
HARISANKAR V. MENON
JUDGE
ln
and 36780 of 2024
2024:KER:79766
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23101/2024
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
Exhibit-P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE UDAMPADI IN THE YEAR 1973
WITH REGARD TO THE MANAGEMENT OF THE TEMPLE.
Exhibit-P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.RDO KLM.564/2023
-N DATED 29/7/2023 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT HEREIN, THE SUB COLLECTOR AND SUB
DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, KOLLAM.
Exhibit-P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
8/11/2023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM.
Exhibit-P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
13/4/2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE
THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOLLAM .
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT R2(a) A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF ISHO SOORANAD
P.S FILED BEFORE THE SUB DIVISIONAL
MAGISTRATE KOLLAM. DATED 29.7.23
and 36780 of 2024
2024:KER:79766
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 36780/2024
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
Exhibit-P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE UDAMPADI IN THE YEAR 1973,
DATED 3-2-1973 WITH REGARD TO THE MANAGEMENT
OF THE TEMPLE
Exhibit-P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17/12/1997 IN
S.M.P.NO.1300/77, M.P. 2/76 BY THE SPECIAL
MUNSIFF'S LAND TRIBUNAL COURT, KOLLAM
Exhibit-P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10/4/1995
BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S MAGISTRATE COURT,
SASTHAMCOTTA IN O.S.NO.136/1991 AND
Exhibit-P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED
BEFORE THE DISTRICT COURT, KOLLAM
Exhibit-P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPROMISE PETITION DATED
4/12/2003 IN I.A.NO.215/2004 IN
S.A.NO.806/2002 BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT
OF KERALA, AT ERNAKULAM
Exhibit-P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29/7/2023
PASSED BY THE SUB COLLECTOR AND SUB
DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit-P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE WRIT PETITION,
W.P.(C)NO.23101/2024(WITHOUT EXHIBITS) DATED
19/6/2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, AT ERNAKULAM
Exhibit-P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY A
SECRETARY MALANADA DEVASWOM, THE 2ND
PETITIONER
Exhibit-P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE PUBLISHED BY THE
PRESIDENT AND THE SECRETARY OF THE
KADUTHAMSSERY KUDUMBAYOGA TRUST.
and 36780 of 2024
2024:KER:79766
Exhibit-P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE FIRST
PETITIONER DATED 11/9/2024
Exhibit-P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED
12/9/2024 BY THE ALLEGED PRESIDENT/SECRETARY
OF THE KADUTHAMSSERY KUNDUMBAYOGA TRUST
Exhibit-P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE DATED
18/9/2024 TO EXT.P10.
Exhibit-P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
4/10/2024 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE
SHO SOORANADU POLICE STATION
Exhibit-P14 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
DATED 4-10-2024
Exhibit-P15 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
8/10/2024 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE
DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM
Exhibit-P16 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
DATED 8-10-2024
Exhibit-P17 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE
RESPONDENTS 7 AND 8
