IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN MONDAY, THE 3RD JANUARY 2011 / 13TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 38620 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. BABY V., S/O. LATE VELAYUDHAN, UPPUMANNUPADIKAYIL, THEKKEDESOM VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 553. 2. JAYABALAN V., S/O. LATE VELAYUDHAN, UPPUMANNUPADIKAYIL, THEKKEDESOM VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 553. 3. VIJAYAN, S/O. LATE VELAYUDHAN, UPPUMANNUPADIKAYIL, THEKKEDESOM VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 553. 4. KARTHIKEYAN, S/O. LATE VELAYUDHAN, UPPUMANNUPADIKAYIL, THEKKEDESOM VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 553. 5. MOHANDAS, S/O. LATE VELAYUDHAN, UPPUMANNUPADIKAYIL, THEKKEDESOM VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 553. 6. PRABALAN, S/O. LATE VELAYUDHAN, UPPUMANNUPADIKAYIL, THEKKEDESOM VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 553. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE HOME SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHITTUR POLICE STATION, CHITTUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 101. WPC.38620/10 2 3. APPU, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, UPPUMANNUPADIKAYIL, THEKKEDESOM VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 553. 4. KANDAMUTHAN, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, UPPUMANNUPADIKAYIL, THEKKEDESOM VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 553. R1, R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.38620 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J. The petitioners state that they are the heirs of one Velayudhan in relation to whose properties Ext.P1 order was issued by the Taluk Land Board way back on 29.5.1989. Even that order refers to a suo motu proceedings of 1986. Long after, it appears that the petitioners made a representation requesting the TLB for change of the property to be surrendered. We do not know the merit of that petition. The petitioners moved this Court and obtained Ext.P3 judgment containing a direction to consider their request. That direction to the TLB is one issued without deciding any question of fact or law that may apply to the case of the petitioners. On the strength of the aforesaid, the petitioners made Ext.P4 representation on 22.12.2010 to the local police officer stating that the property which is in their possession may be protected from being encroached upon by the WPC.38620/10 2 local people. We are clear in our mind that it is not for the police to decide on any disputed question of title or possession. Learned Government Pleader also submits that the properties covered by Ext.P1 were actually taken over and distributed to the landless and any order of this Court at this point of time to grant police protection for enjoyment of the property would only be abused against public interest. We direct the police to maintain law and order and to refrain from interfering in disputed claims for possession or title. We clarify that these directions will not preclude the TLB from deciding appropriately the application pending before it. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. Sd/- P.S.GOPINATHAN, Judge. kkb.4/1.