IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN MONDAY, THE 1ST JUNE 2009 / 11TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 10917 of 2009(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. GOSPEL FOR ASIA,MANJADI,THIRUVALLA, MG.TRUSTEE DR.DANIEL JOHNSON,REP.THROUGH HIS P/A HOLDER T.P.MATHEW,GENERAL MANAGER,B.C.CHERUVALLY ESTATE,POST BOX NO.2,ERUMELY P.O.,KOTTAYAM,PIN- 686 509,R/AT THAZHATHEMALAYIL,CHIRAYIRAMBU PO, MARAMAN,THOTTAPPUZHASSERY VILLAGE,PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. T.P.MATHEW,GENERAL MANAGER, B.C.CHERUVALLY ESTATE,POST BOX NO.2,ERUMELY P.O., KOTTAYAM, PIN-686 509,RESIDING AT THAZHATHEMALAYIL CHIRAYIRAMBU P.O., MARAMAN, THOTTAPPUZHASSERY VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.CHERIAN GEE VARGHESE SRI.P.HARIDAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM. 3. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KANJIRAPPALLY. 4. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANIMALA POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM. 5. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ERUMELY. 6. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANIMALA. W.P.(C) No.10917 of 2009 7. BALAKRISHNA PERUMAL, AGED 62, S/O.KOCHERUCKEN, VAZHEPARAMBIL VEETTIL, VIII TH MILE COLONY, KADAYANIKKATTU KARA, VELLAVOOR VILLAGE. 8. A.T.PODIYAN, AGED 52, S/O.THOMAS, EDATHARA VEETTIL, KANNAMPADY BHAGOM, MULLAKARA KARA, UPPUNNA VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 9. BABU, AGED 49, S/O.PAPPEN, ADUKOLLIL VEETTIL, KANNAMPADY BHAGOM, MULLAKARA KARA, UPPUNNA VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 10. P.A.RAJU, AGED 42, S/O.AYYAPPAN, PALLATTU VEETTIL, NEAR SANJOSE ENGLISH MEDIUM SCHOOL, CHUNDASSERIL KARA, BHARANANGANAM VILLAGE. 11. RAJAN, AGED 42, S/O.PAPPAN, ADUKOLLIL VEETTIL, KANNAMPADY BHAGHOM, PUNNAPARA KARA, UPPUTHARA VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 12. RAGHAVAN, AGED 56, S/O.ANNIMETHY, EECHAPOIKAYIL VEETTIL, KANNAMKAYIL VALIYA PATHAN BHAGHOM, CHETHACKAL VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DIST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No.10917/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE DEED NO.2329/2005 DT. 1.8.2005 EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 13.8.2007 OF ERUMELI VILLAGE. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DT. 13.8.2007 OF MANIMALA VILLAGE. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION GRANTED BY CHIEF INSPECTOR OF PLANTATIONS , KOTTAYAM, DT. 1.8.90 EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 2.7.1982 ISSUED BY THE TALUK LAND BOARD, VYTHIRI. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CRP.NO.3661/1982 DATED 25.11.1993. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.12633/05/B8 DATED 5.6.2008 ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR, KANJIRAPPPALLY TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B8-12633/2005 DATED 11.12.2008. EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOTTAYAM, DATED 18.12.2008. EXT.P10 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 2-2-2009 IN W.P.(C) NO.2933/2009. EXT.P11 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 14.3.2009 TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXT.P12 TRUE COPY OF THE PAPER REPORT IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 15.3.2009. EXT.P13 TRUE COPY OF THE PAPER REPORT IN M ATHRUBHOOMI DAILY DT.15.3.2009. EXT.P14 TRUE COPY OF THE PAPER REPORT IN DEEPIKA DAILY DT. 15.3.2009. EXT.P15 TRUE COPY OF THE PAPER REPORT IN DESHABHIMANI DAILY DT. 15.3.2009. EXT.P16 TRUE COPY OF THE PAPER REPORT IN CHANDRIKA DAILY DT. 15.3.2009. EXT.P17 TRUE COPY OF THE PAPER REPORT IN MADHAYAMAN DAILY DT. 15.3.2009 //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. P.R.RAMAN & P.BHAVADASAN, JJ. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.10917 of 2009 ------------------------------- Dated this the 1st June, 2009 J U D G M E N T Raman, J. The first petitioner is a religious charitable society and it has recently purchased a rubber plantation of 2263 acres, the second petitioner being its general manager. They have a further case the Taluk Land Board, Vaithiri, considered the excess land issue in 1982 itself and it was found that there was no excess land. It is submitted that there is an attempt on the part of respondents 7 to 12 to encroach into the estate and to conduct a siege. Though information regarding the same was given to the police, they were not extending effective protection. According to the petitioners, there is no civil dispute between the parties. A decree, if any, obtained in execution will be ineffective to prevent such mass movement, and hence, this writ petition for police protection. W.P.(C) No.10917 of 2009 2 2. Notice was issued to party respondents 7 to 12 by special messenger and service is complete. The second respondent was also directed to state the present state of affairs and steps, if any, taken to prevent the encroachment. We have also heard the the learned counsel appearing for the 7th respondent and gave him an opportunity to file counter affidavit. Pending further consideration, as per order dated 7.4.2009, we directed that law and order shall be maintained. 3. As directed by this Court, the second respondent, Superintendent of Police, has filed an affidavit. It is averred therein that the Estate owned by M/s.Harison Malayalam Ltd. was purchased by M/s.Gospel for Asia headed by Dr.K.P.Yohannan on 2.8.2005. The estate extends about 2263 acres in Erumely South Village and Manimala Village and comes under the jurisdiction of Erumely and Manimala Police Station limits. It is a rubber estate and there are about 400 labourers working besides office and managerial staffs. It is stated that there were attempts to encroach into the estate by one Akhila W.P.(C) No.10917 of 2009 3 Thiruvithamkoor Hindu Cheramar Sabha on 21.10.07 in which 48 activists were arrested and 5 vehicles were also seized and preventive action was taken under Section 151 Cr.P.C. 19 CPI (ML) activists were also arrested. Thus, police have taken effective steps in this regard. On 14.3.2009, when there was an attempt to encroach the estate by 43 activists of Bhoosamara Munnani, they were arrested and legal action was also taken. It is also averred that various units of Bhoosamara Munnani are now being watched closely, having due regard to the fact that estate has no boundary wall or fencing. It is also stated that entry into the estate at any time by any people cannot possibly be prevented, and, therefore, providing full proof protection to such a large extent of land is practically not possible, unless large number of police personnels have to be deployed for purpose. However, as and when information regarding attempts of encroachments is made, police will take necessary action in this regard to remove such encroachments. W.P.(C) No.10917 of 2009 4 4. In the factual situation, as stated above, it cannot be said that police is inactive in the matter and what is possibly could be done in the situation is being attended to, and they will continue to provide such protection as and when required. The petitioner is also satisfied with the steps that has been taken in this regard, as stated above. The same is recorded and the writ petition is closed. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.BHAVADASAN , JUDGE. nj.