IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 3RD JANUARY 2011 / 13TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 35290 of 2010(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- PONGALVILA DEVI SHETRHAM TRUST OZHUKUPURA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MR.AJITH RAJ, S/O.BABURAJAN, AGED 31 YEARS. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANU SRI.S.K.PREMRAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. 3. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, FOREST DEPARTMENT, MARAYUR, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 4. DEVARAJAN, S/O.KUNJIRAMAN, AGED 64 YEARS, SUNIL LAND, PUTHENKULAM CHERI, POOTHAKULAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BENNY VARGHESE FOR R1-3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.35290 OF 2010(I) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T The dispute in this writ petition is regarding the disposal of a sandal wood that was cut and removed from the premises of the petitioner temple. 2. According to the petitioner, there was a sandal wood tree in the temple premises. Pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2, on 1.12.2005, the sandal wood tree was cut and removed to Marayur Forest Depot. Ext.P3 is the mahazar prepared. At that stage, it would appear that the 4th respondent claimed title over the timber and a lawyer notice was issued in this behalf to the 3rd respondent. Subsequently, petitioner submitted Ext.P6 representation to the 3rd respondent requesting to sell the sandal wood in auction and to keep the value fetched. To that request of the petitioner, Ext.P7 reply was given stating that since no orders have been passed in this respect by the Paravur Munsiff Court, which disposed of O.S.No.1/2001 and as further disputes are pending consideration of the Court, until the disputes are finally resolved, no further action can be taken. It is in these circumstances, the WPC.No. 35290/2010 :2 : petitioner has filed this writ petition. 3. By order dated 25.11.2010, this court has issued notice to the 4th respondent by speed post. Despite service of notice there is no appearance on his behalf. Learned Government Pleader who has obtained instruction in the matter submits that it was only on account of the disputes raised by the 4th respondent that they are not in a position to take further action on Ext.P6. 4. As at present, although it is a fact that the dispute between the petitioner and the 4th respondent concerning the title to the sandal wood in question are pending, no order has been passed by any court preventing disposal of the sandal wood. It is also a fact thatt he timber being a perishable article, unless it is disposed of, its value will be reduced. Therefore it is in the interest of both parties to have the timber in question auctioned. 5. In that view of the matter, I am inclined to think that the 3rd respondent should be permitted to dispose of the sandal wood in question in public auction, in accordance with the rules framed for the disposal of such timber. This the 3rd respondent shall do on the production of a copy of the judgment. WPC.No. 35290/2010 :3 : 6. It is directed that the value fetched in auction shall be kept in a separate account and the disbursal of this amount will depend upon the decision in O.S.No.483/08 on the file of the Additional District Court, Kollam, which suit is stated to be pending. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/