IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 23RD SEPTEMBER 2010 / 1ST ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 29374 of 2010(V) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- THOMAS JOHN, S/O.JOHN, AGED 44 YEARS DIVISIONAL OVERSEER OF THE SOCIETY CHURCH OF GOD FULL GOSPEL IN INDIA, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE PAKKIL PO, NATTAKAM VILLAGE, PALLAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.K.SABU RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. K.C.JOHN, S/O.CHACKO, AGED 62 KIZHAKKE PULIYIL, MELAKKADU PO, KIOZHAKKANCHERRY VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA TALUK. 2. SAJI O.K, S/O.KUNJUKUNJU, AGED 37 UNNATHOLIL, PERUMPETTY VILLAGE, PERUMPETTY P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA TALUK. 3. SAM JOSEPH, AGED 35, S/O.C.I.JOSEPH, ERIMADAYIL HOUSE PUNNAVELI PO, PUNNAVELI, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 4. ROBINSON ABRAHAM, AGED 42 S/O.P.C. ABRAHAM, PALIYAKUNNATH, NARAKATHANI PO, MALLAPPALLY VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA. 5. BABU MATHEW, AGED 44, S/O.MATHAI PATHROSE PARAKADAVIL HOUSE, KURUMBANADAM PO, CHANGANANSSERY TALUK. 6. LAIJU, AGED 42, S/O.PATHROSE VALIYAMUNDAKAM, CHENGALAM PO, KOTTAYAM TALUK. 7. SAJI V.Y, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.YOHANNAN, VALUPARAMBIL VEEDU MUNDIAMPALLY PO, THIRUVALLA. 8. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CENTRAL REGION, ERNAKULAM 9. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM 10. DYSP OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM 11. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CHANGANACHERRY ,KOTTAYAM 12. S.I.OF POLICE, CHINGAVANAM, KOTTAYAM. R8 TO R12 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.29374 of 2010-V ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 23rd day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. The prayers in the writ petition are as follows: “i). to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, direction or order directing respondents 8 to 12 to render adequate protection to the petitioner and church properties. ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondents 8 to 12 to take effective and immediate action on Exhibit P9 representation.” 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is that petitioner is an evangelist and the Divisional Overseer of 'the Society Church of God. The most important aim of the church is the gospel work. Petitioner got ordained by issuing Bishop certificate as per Ext.P2. By Ext.P3, the Field Director of the church of God Asia/Pacific has extended the tenure of the office till August 31, 2010. Ext.P4 is the extension certificate allegedly issued by the highest authority of the church. There WPC 29374/2010 -2- is allegation about Ext.P5, the alleged letter sent to the petitioner by the Ist respondent contending false allegations. Petitioner filed Ext.P6 suit O.S.No.460/2010 and Ext.P7 application for temporary injunction. The Munsiff court, Kottayam has appointed an Advocate Commissioner. Ext.P8 is the commission report in the suit filed by the petitioner. Thereafter, it is stated that respondents 1 to 7 are obstructing the petitioner from performing his official duties. It is also stated that they have given threat to his body. As the petitioner is the divisional overseer he has to go to different parts of the world, it is stated. Petitioner filed Ext.P9 representation. 3. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. After going through the writ petition we are not convinced that the petitioner has made out a case for this Court to exercise the extra ordinary jurisdiction. Petitioner has already instituted a civil suit. An interlocutory application is also pending consideration. At this stage, we do not think that it is appropriate for this Court to interfere in the matter. We relegate the petitioner to pursue his remedies before the WPC 29374/2010 -3- civil Court. We make it clear that, if the petitioner complains of commission of any cognizable offience by the party respondents before the official respondents, respondents 11 or 12 such of the official respondents before whom the complaint is lodged shall take action on the same in accordance with law. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.C.HARI RANI) JUDGE. MS