IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2009 / 17TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 36248 of 2004(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- NANU THANKAPPAN, S/O. NANU, SECRETARY, KAVINTE THEKKETHIL THRIMOORTHI TEMPLE, MEKKAD, PANMANA VILLAGE, SANKARAMANGALAM, CHAVARA-691 583. BY ADV. SRI.SIBY MATHEW SRI.A.A.MOHAMMED NAZIR SRI.PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER (LAND REVENUE) TO GOVERNMENT COMMISSIONER OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHAVARA. BY G.P. SRI. P.K. RAVIKRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER ON 1.8.1995 EXT.P2 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF NOTICE NO. LRJ-29806/95/L.DIS. DATED 6.5.1996 FROM THE BOARD OF REVENUE (LR), TVM. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 7.6.1999 IN OP NO.13625 OF 1999 V OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.L6-34445/99/(1) DATED 15.7.2000 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION FILED BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT ON 14.11.2000 EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP 33220 OF 2000 DATED 12.1.2001OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.L6-34445/99/K.DIS DATED 3.5.2003 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. LR (J3) 19406/2003/D.DIS. DATED 8.6.2004 BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 36248 OF 2004 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner is challenging Ext.P8 order whereunder the Commissioner of Land Revenue has confirmed the rejection of petitioner's claim for assignment of land. On going through the impugned order and after hearing parties, I am of the view that petitioner has no right to seek assignment of the land, which in the revenue records is Kshethra Puramboke. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is one of the trustees in management of the temple. Obviously temple authorities are allowed to run the temple without any obstruction whatsoever from the revenue authorities. I do not think assignment in favour a trustee is required for continued functioning of the temple. Since Government does not propose to take over the land for assignment to any other party, petitioner cannot have any grievance . Consequently WPC is dismissed. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge kk 2