IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS FRIDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2010 / 21ST JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 15785 of 2010(W) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- IDIYANGARA PALLI PARIPALANA COMMITTEE REPRESNTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.T.ALIKOYA HAJI, AGED 65 YEARS, S/O.LATE MAMMED KOYA, PANNIYANKARA AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE - 3. BY ADV. SRI.ESM.KABEER RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. K.V.FATHIMA, AGED 42 YEARS, D/O.LATE ASSAN KOYA, ZULFIKAR MANZIL, IDIYANGARA, PARAPPIL P.O., NAGARAM AMSOM, DESOM, KOZHIKODE. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOZHIKODE TOWN POLICE STATION. R1 BY ADV. SRI.N.SUBRAMANIAM SRI.M.S.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.15785 of 2010-W ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 11th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. The prayers in the writ petition are as follows: “i) to call for the records relating to Exhibit P1 to P11 and to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner to exclusively use the masjid road and to construct the compound wall and gate leading to the masjid. ii) to issue any writ, order or direction directing the 2nd respondent to maintain law and order from the unauthorized construction of the Ist respondent in the wakf property in view of Exhibit P6, P8 and P11.” 2. We heard Sri.E.S.M.Kabeer, learned counsel for the petitioner and also Sri.M.S.Narayanan, learned counsel for the Ist respondent. A counter affidavit is filed by the Ist respondent. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner is the Secretary of a registered Wakf. There are reference to various interim orders which have been passed by the Tribunal and also by this Court. There is also Wpc No.15785/2010 -2- reference to Ext.P11 order of the Town Planning Officer to stop construction. The short complaint is that in spite of Ext.P8 order the Ist respondent is proceeding with the unauthorized construction blocking the passage exclusively used by the masjid. Petitioner emphasizes Ext.P5 report of the Wakf Inspector wherein it is found that the road leading to the masjid is exclusively used by the masjid. 3. In the nature of the main prayer sought (prayer No.1) we would think that it may not be appropriate for this Court in its extraordinary jurisdiction to interfere in the matter. Essentially, the orders which are produced are interlocutory in nature. The matter is pending final consideration before the authorities. We decline jurisdiction and relegate the petitioner to approach competent forum. We make it clear that we have not pronounced on the contentions of the parties. As far as the 2nd prayer is concerned, it is submitted by the Ist respondent that the construction is already over and that the construction was made in the property of the Ist respondent. We have not pronounced on the question as to whether the construction is in the property Wpc No.15785/2010 -3- of the Ist respondent. That is a matter to be decided in appropriate forum. In such circumstances the writ petition is disposed of relegating the petitioner to approach competent forum and work out his remedies. We, however, make it clear that if there is any complaint regarding commission of any cognizable offence by the party respondent effective action shall be taken on the same in accordance with law by the official respondent. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE. MS