IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 31ST JANUARY 2008 / 11TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 30997 of 2007(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ MANIKANDAN NAIR, S/O.DAMODARAN NAIR, T.C.NO.50/675, GENERAL SECRETARY, VISWA HINDU PARISHATH STATE COMMITTEE. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, O/O. THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POOJAPPURA POLICE STATION, POOJAPPURA. 5. MADHUSOODHANAN NAIR, VILAKATHU VEEDU, UNNOOR, THIRUMALA. 6. PURUSHOTHAMAN NAIR, S/O.NARAYANA PILLAI, THURUTHUMMOOLA VEEDU, THRIKKANNAPURAM WARD, THIRUMALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 7. K. GOPALAKRISHNAN, KIZHAKKEPUTHEN VEEDU, MANGADU, THIRUMALA. BY ADV. SRI.J.HARIKUMAR SRI.HARIKUMAR.S. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BENNY GERVASIS. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/01/2008, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 1283 OF 2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC 30997/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS. EXT.P1 - PHOTO COPY OF THE GIFT DEED DATED 17.7.2007 EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF THE VISWA HINDU PARISHAT EXT.P2 - PHOTO COPY OF THE ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE. EXT.P3 - PHOTO COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT. EXT.P4 - PHOTO COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 22.9.2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POOJAPPURA. EXT.P5 - PHOTO COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P6 - PHOTO COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P7 - PHOTO COPY OF THE COMPLAINT TO THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P8 - PHOTO COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXTS. EXT.R6(a) – TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 24.4.1979 IN A.A. NO.1932/1997. EXT.R6(b) – TRUE COPY OF AGREEMENT DATED 18.3.1988 IN FAVOUR OF NSS KARAYOGAM NO.233. EXT.R6(c) – TRUE COPY OF MINUTES OF THE NSS KARAYOGAM NO.233 DATED 26.1.1988. EXT.R6(d) – TRUE COPY OF MINUTES OF THE KARAYOGAM GENERAL BODY MEETING HELD ON 10.12.2006. EXT.R6(e) – TRUE COPY OF THE FIR DATED 27.5.2007 OF POOJAPPURA POLICE STATION. EXT.R6(f) - TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 14.3.2007 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THIRUMALA. EXT.R6(g) – TRUE COPY OF PETITION DATED 9.3.2007 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE SUB INSPECTOR, POOJAPPURA POLICE STATION. EXT.R6(h) – TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 10.10.2007 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.R6(i) – TRUE COPY OF THE OP.(CAVEAT) NO.251 OF 2007 DATED 9.10.2007 FILED BEFORE THE SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. /TRUE COPY/ K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NOS. 30997/2007 & 1283/2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated 31st January, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. W.P.(C) No.1283/2008: The petitioner is the President of Annoor Bhagavathy Vilasom N.S.S.Karayogam No.233. The Annoor Bhagavathy Temple belongs to a family called “Melethil Veedu”. Since the members could not administer the temple, they entrusted the administration of the same to the local people. A committee was formed and the temple was being administered by the said committee. Since the committee could not continue with the administration effectively, the members of the family decided to entrust the right to administer the temple to the local Karayogam under Ext.P1 registered deed. Ext.P1 was executed pursuant to the decision taken as per Ext.P2 minutes. Eversince the execution of Ext.P1, the petitioner claims the temple is being administered by the local Karayogam headed by him. While so, based on WPC NOS.30997/07 & 1283/08 2 some sham documents, the respondents 3 to 6 and others started claiming the right to administer the temple. In the above background the Karayogam filed O.S.No.1892/2007 before the Munsiff's Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The court has passed Ext.P10 interim order of injunction, restraining respondents 4 to 6 herein and another from interfering with the possession and administration of the temple and its properties. The petitioner submits, the said interim order is even now in force. The respondents 4 to 6 have filed a civil suit before the Munsiff's Court, Thiruvananthapuram to establish their right over the temple. But, there is no interim order in the said suit, it is submitted. Though the respondents 3 to 6 have no right over the temple or its properties, they are physically obstructing the administration of the same by the petitioner's Karayogam. Therefore, the Karayogam moved the police seeking their help to administer the temple, by filing Ext.P5 representation. The police have not taken any effective action on Ext.P5, to avert breach of peace. The petitioner requires their permanent assistance to run the temple. Therefore, this writ petition is filed, seeking appropriate reliefs. 2. The respondents 3 to 6 would submit that the organization of which the 3rd respondent is the General Secretary, obtained the temple from its owner as per Ext.R3(b) gift deed. Eversince the execution of that deed, WPC NOS.30997/07 & 1283/08 3 the said organization is in possession and management of the temple and its properties, it is submitted. The writ petitioner is unnecessarily interfering with its right to administer the temple. So, the 3rd respondent has filed W.P. (C) No.30997/2007, seeking police protection to administer the temple and for removal of the obstruction offered by the petitioner herein and his supporters. 3. The learned Government Pleader, upon instructions, submitted that whenever cognizable offence was reported, crime has been registered by the police. Further, the S.I of Police has moved the Sub Divisional Magistrate, pointing out the dispute regarding the temple between two groups and also requesting action under Section 145 of the Cr.P.C. 4. Having regard to the nature of the dispute between the parties, we feel that it is not proper for this Court to direct the police to help one side or the other. If Ex.P10 interim order is violated, the writ petitioner's remedy lies before the civil court itself. But, if any cognizable offence is reported, needless to say, the police shall take appropriate action thereon. The police shall also endeavour to maintain law and order in the area and avert breach of peace. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. WPC NOS.30997/07 & 1283/08 4 W.P.(C) No.30997/2007: 5. The judgment in W.P.(C) No. 1283/2008 shall be treated as the judgment in this case also. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. Nm/