IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DECEMBER 2010 / 1ST POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 36002 of 2010(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA KSHETHRA SAMRAKSHANA SAMITHI, REG.NO.142/77, KENDRA KARYALAYAM, PALLIYARA, KOZHIKODE, REP. BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, SWAMY AYYAPPADAS, "THATHWAMASI", MUTHALAKODAM POST, THODUPUZHA. 2. SWAMY AYYAPPADAS, "THATHWAMASI", MUTHALAKODAM POST, THODUPUZHA. 3. T.N.VENUGOPAL,"SREE VINAYAKAM", KIZHAKKEKKARA, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 4. V.K.SAJEEV KUMAR, NANDAVANAM, PADINJATTINKARA, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GOVIND K.BHARATHAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.S.K.MADHU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. TEH ADMINISTRATOR, SREE MAHA GANAPATHI TEMPLE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. THE KOTTARAKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. WPC.36002/10 2 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. 5. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADDL.6. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, KOLLAM. R1 BY SRI.P.G.PARAMESWARA PANICKER, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.GOPAL R3 TO R6 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.LAKSHMI NARAYAN (ADDL.R6 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 9.12.2010 IN IA.17134/10) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & P. BHAVADASAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.36002 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J. 1.The writ petitioners claim to represent the interest of the devotees of Kottarakkara Mahaganapati Temple. The controversy raised is in relation to a parcel of land. Going by the counter affidavit, though a short one, filed by the TDB, the Government is in occupation of that parcel and the building therein for a long number of years. They had an Excise Department office in that plot. With the passage of time, the Government has sanctioned the construction of a new building on that parcel. It is at this point of time that this writ petition is filed on the premise that the land in question is essentially part of the Kottarakkara Mahaganapati Temple Complex, though the Government appears to have parted with rights in favour of some institutions, which, according to the petitioner, WPC.36002/10 2 are nothing but political outfits. Those plots are of very negligible extent of 3 cents or so. 2.Whatever that be, as of now, the Devaswom Board is unable to assert as to the title to the property in question though it states that in the settlement register, the land is shown as sangetham, karam ozhivu. We also record the submission of the TDB that the temple being a personal deposit temple, the Board will not be able to take a final view in the matter merely on the basis of the entries in the settlement register. 3.With the aforesaid, we do not deem it appropriate for us to take any view against the Government which stands to say that it needs to put up a building for its public purpose of having certain offices. 4.Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances and the disputed questions of facts that we see, we do not propose to answer either way on the rival claims but would WPC.36002/10 3 leave the parties with liberty to seek remedies, if any, from the appropriate courts. 5.Hence, this writ petition is closed with liberty to the Board to assert its title against the Government, if it needs to do so, through the competent courts. It is clarified that if the writ petitioner or any among the devotees, individually or in the collective interest, wishes to sustain a litigation, closure of this writ petition will not stand in the way of their seeking relief even on behalf of the deity, in accordance with law. We hasten to add that we have not expressed anything on the merits of the rival claims. All interim orders granted in this case will stand vacated hereby. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. Sd/- P.BHAVADASAN, Judge. kkb.23/12.