IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 18TH AUGUST 2008 / 27TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 24801 of 2008(C) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: ----------------- 1. ISHAKH.O., KLHADER MAHZIL, PATHIRODE LANE, BALARAMAPURAM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 2. SHAHEED.K., SAFIA MANZIL, PETTANADA, BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 3. SHAHUL HAMEED, VARUVILAKATHU VEEDU ANJUVANATHERUVU, BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 4. SAJID, VILAKATH, AYANIMOODU, BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.G.VIDYA SRI.K.A.RIYAS RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA STATE WAKF BOARD, OFFICE OF THE KERALA STATE WAKF BOARD, VIP ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI. 2. WAKF BOARD, REP. BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, O/O.THE KERALA STATE WAKF BOARD, VIP ROAD, KALOOR , KOCHI. 3. M.K.SUBAIR, GENERAL SECRETARY TOWN MUSLIM JAMA-ATH, BALARAMAPURAM PO., NEYYATTINKARA, TRIVANDRUM 4. A.M.MASOOD, PRESIDENT, BALARAMAPURAM TOWN JAMA-ATH, PO.BALARAMAPURAM NEYYATTINKARA, TRIVANDRUM. 5. HAJA, CASHIER-CUM-VICE PRESIDENT BALARAMAPURAM TOWN JAMA-ATH, PO.BALARAMAPURAM NEYYATTINKARA, TRIVANDRUM. 6. KHADEDR, MEMBER, TOWN MUSLIM JAMA-ATH PO.BALARAMAPURAM, NEYYATTINKARA, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.M.M.SAIDU MUHAMMED,SC,WAKF BOARD FOR R1,2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No. 24801 OF 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioners are residents of Balaramapuram area who are governed by Muslim Law. They have certain complaints against the Jama-Ath controlled by respondents 3 to 6 in respect of which Ext.P2 complaint has been filed before the 2nd respondent. The petitioners allege that because the petitioners preferred Ext.P2 complaint, respondents 3 to 6 had engineered ostracising of the petitioners from the community, against which the petitioners have filed Ext.P4 representation before the 1st respondent. The petitioners now seek expeditious disposal of Exts.P2 and P4. 2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2 would submit that as far as Ext.P2 is concerned, very detailed enquiry has to be conducted, for which at least six months time would be needed. So also, for considering Ext.P4, respondents 1 and 2 would require at least W.P.(c)No.24801/08 2 three months time, is the submission made. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the ostracising of the petitioners may be prevented in the meanwhile. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 2. In the nature of the order I propose to pass I do not think it necessary to issue notice to respondents 3 to 6 at present. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: Respondents 1 and 2 shall see that Ext.P2 is disposed of as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. They shall dispose of Ext.P4 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the petitioners move for interim direction to keep ostracism proceedings in abeyance, respondents 1 and 2 shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in the next meeting of the Board. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd W.P.(c)No.24801/08 3