IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH OCTOBER 2010 / 5TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 32102 of 2010(K) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ SALINI DEV, AGED 28 YEARS, D/O. VASANTHA KUMARI, SHARATH BHAVAN, VADASERRI KONAM.P.O., VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.C.V.MANUVILSAN SRI.P.G.SURESH SMT.K.VIDYA SRI.Y.CONSTANTINE RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE HOME SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DY. SP, ATTINGAL,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. S.I. OF POLICE, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. ANEETH, S/O. SIVASHANKARAN, THOPPIL HOUSE, VADASERRI KONAM, OTTUR VILLAGE, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695141. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: SVS/ K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * * W.P.C.No.32102 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of October 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.JOSEPH,J The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to provide police protection to the petitioner and her family members for offering worship to the family deity. 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: 3. The petitioner and her family offer prayers to the family deity in their family temple. There are several disputes among the family members regarding the property. The 5th respondent, who is one of her relatives, has recently prevented her from entering the temple and told her that he was going to convert it into a tourist resort. The petitioner held a 'Devapreshnam' with an astrologer and found that the 'Paradevatha' is angry on the present activities of the temple and required various Poojas and rituals as remedial measures. It is alleged that the petitioner and her family went to the temple and then they were manhandled and threatened by the 5th W.P.C.No.32102 of 2010 2 respondent. The petitioner has never been party to any civil dispute between the family members including the 5th respondent. The petitioner filed a complaint; but no action has been taken so far. The petitioner has come to this Court aggrieved by the invasion of her fundamental right under Article 25 of the Constitution of India. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. The learned Government Pleader would submit that it is essentially a dispute on the property. The petitioner and her family sold the property in the year 2006 and there is no religious worship in that property. 5. Having heard the learned Government Pleader and the learned counsel for the petitioner, we feel that it is more appropriate if the petitioner is so advised to approach the competent civil court in the matter. Leaving open the questions which are raised by the petitioner to be urged by the petitioner before the competent forum, the writ petition is disposed of. (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge W.P.C.No.32102 of 2010 3 W.P.C.No.32102 of 2010 4 W.P.C.No.32102 of 2010 5 K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. .No. of 200 ORDER/JUDGMENT 30/082010