IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS THURSDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 29TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 21418 of 2009(V) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. DHANUSHKODI, AGED 38, S/O.KUPPUSWAMY, MARAYOOR GRAMAM, MARAYOOR P.O. 2. PARAMASIVAN, AGED 36, S/O.BHAGAVATHY, MARAYOOR GRAMAM, MARAYOOR P.O., IDUKKI. 3. NATARAJAN, (DORAI) NATTARAJAN, AGED 38, S/O.T.K.MUTHUSWAMY, MARAYOOR GRAMAM, MARAYOOR P.O. BY ADV. SRI.JOHNSON MANAYANI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. M.VIJAYAKUMAR, COMMITTEE PRESIDENT MARAYOOR GRAMAM. 2. K.RAJANIKANTH, SECRETARY, MARAYOOR GRAMAM, MARAYOOR P.O. 3. M.SEKHARAN, MANNADIYAR, MARAYOOR GRAMAM. 4. NJANASEKHARAN M.S., MANNADIYAR, KEEZHANTHOOR GRAMAM, KEEZHANTHOOR, KANTHALOOR GRAMAM. 5. R.GOPALAKRISHNAN, COMMITTEE MEMBER KEEZHANTHOOR GRAMAM, KANTHALOOR P.O. 6. SUBRAMANYAN.S., MANNADIYAR, KARAYOOR GRAMAM, PIOUS NAGAR POST, IDUKKI. 7. ANJUNAD IKYASABHA, MARAYOOR GRAMAM MARAYOOR P.O., REP. BY SRI.M.K.KUMAR. 8. SECRETARY TO HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 9. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PAINAVU, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 10. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MARAYOOR POLICE STATION, MARAYOOR. 11. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. ADV. SRI.JOICE GEORGE FOR R1-7 R8 TO 11 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. T.K. VIPIN DAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXTS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE OF EXCOMMUNICATION DT. 19.2.2009. EXT.P2(a) MALAYALAM TRANSLATION OF EXT.P2. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF ANOTHER NOTICE OF EXCOMMUNICATION DT. 8.9.09 IN TAMIL. EXT.P3(a) MALAYALAM TRANSLATION OF EXT.P3. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE OF EXCOMMUNICATION. EXT.P4(a) MALAYALAM TRANSLATION OF EXT.P4. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF ARTICLE PUBLISHED IN KERALA KAUMUDI FLASH. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DT. 16.7.09 FILED BEFORE THE HON'BLE MINISTER FOR HOME AND SECRETARY TO HOME AFFAIRS. /TRUE COPY/ K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No. 21418 of 2009 V - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT Joseph, J. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs. “i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writs direction or orders commanding respondents 8 to 11 to enquire into the petitioners' Ext.P5 and enquire into the offences against the petitioners committed by respondents 1 to 7 and by their supporters; ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, directions or orders commanding respondents 8 to 11 to promulgate law declaring Ooruvilakku or ex-communication as grave offences and charge sheet cases against respondents 1 to 7 W.P.(C).No. 21418 of 2009 2 and against their supporters for committing offences and declaring Ooruvilakku against the petitioners; iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, directions or orders directing respondents 8 to 11 to render sufficient police protection to the petitioners and to their family members to thwart any attempted further offences by respondents 1 to 7 and by their supporters.” 2. Briefly the case of the petitioners is as follows. The petitioners were ex-communicated by respondents 1 to 7 and by their supporters. There is an allegation about violation of Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution and other fundamental rights. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 7, in which it is, inter alia, stated as follows. “5. It is submitted that the answering respondents are living in Marayoor, Kanthalloor and Karayoor Gramams in Marayoor and Kanthalloor Panchayats in W.P.(C).No. 21418 of 2009 3 Idukki District. The predecessors of the answering respondents migrated to the said places before 400 years. The people living in the gramam are following certain rituals and practices as thereon. The committees duly elected by the people of the Gramams are managing its affairs. The committee is arranging water supply for household use and irrigation. The pathways leading to the Gramam are being maintained by the committee. A watcher by name 'Dantalkaran' has also been appointed by the committee. The management of the temple in the Gramam including the payment of salary to the 'Poojari' is being done by the committee. The expense for providing the said amenities including electricity charges are being met by the committee by centuries. But the petitioners have not been co-operating with the other people of the Gramam in their collective efforts to arrange minimum amenities for life. These respondents are not in any way interfering with the lives of the petitioners by imposing restrictions or making obstructions. The petitioners are opted to lead a separate life apart from that of the community. The members of the Gramam are not in any way concerned about the petitioners as they have opted themselves to lead a separate life and have a separate entity. W.P.(C).No. 21418 of 2009 4 In reply to the averments in the writ petition, it is submitted that these respondents had not excommunicated the petitioners as alleged. As mentioned earlier, we are not in any way obstructing the pathway, right to purchase and right to employment of the petitioners. These respondents has never been charge sheeted on the basis of Ext.P1 FIR. The said crime was registered on the basis of a complaint filed by the wife of the 3rd petitioner against some other persons on the basis of an alleged incident took place on 13.2.2009. The allegations in Ext.P1 FIR is not in any way connected with these respondents as we have not been interrogated or charge sheeted in connection with the alleged commission of offence, to the best of our information. These respondents did not issue Ext.P2 notice as alleged. Ext.P2 is a communication allegedly issued by the Secretary of Ooru Committee, Marayoor Panchayat. Exts.P3 and P4 notices are also not published by these respondents for excommunicating the petitioners. Ext.P5 is only a news item which contains untrue and imaginary facts. Ext.P5 news items were published at the instance of the 1st petitioner who has been trying to tarnish the community in front of the general public.” W.P.(C).No. 21418 of 2009 5 4. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for respondents 4 to 7 and the learned Government Pleader. 5. Learned counsel for respondents 4 to 7 submits that they are not connected with Exts.P2 and P3. In view of the stand taken by respondents 4 to 7, which we record, we direct respondents 9 and 10 that in case the petitioners are obstructed by respondents 1 to 7 in the matter of travelling, purchasing goods from shop, getting employment, they will provide adequate protection to the petitioners against respondents 1 to 7. (K. M. JOSEPH) Judge (M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS) Judge tm