IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI TUESDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2008 / 10TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 19755 of 2008(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAI, MANAGER, KOVOOR UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ARINALLOOR POST, KOLLAM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM 2. THE C.I. OF POLIICE, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM 4. KUTTY, PERUVATHAM VEEDU, KOVOOR, ARINALOOR POST, KOLLAM 5. SIVARAMAN, PERUVATHAM VEEDU KOVOOR, ARINALOOR POST, KOLLAM 6. RAMACHANDRAN, PERUVATHAM VEEDU, KOVOOR, ARINALOOR POST, KOLLAM 7. BINDU PERUVATHAM VEEDU, KOVOOR, ARINALOOR POST, KOLLAM 8. AYYAPPAN, KUTTIPPURATHU VEEDU, KOVOOR, ARINALOOR POST, KOLLAM WP(C).No. 19755 of 2008(B) 9. SANKARAN, KUTTIPPURATHU VEEDU, KOVOOR, ARINALOOR POST, KOLLAM 10. KESAVAN, KUTTIPPURATHU VEEDU, KOVOOR, ARINALOOR POST, KOLLAM 11. DAMODARAN, MUKKODAYATHU VEEDU KOVOOR, ARINALOOR POST, KOLLAM 12. SOMAN, MUKKODAYATHU VEEDU, KOVOOR, ARINALOOR POST, KOLLAM 13. RAGHU, MUKKODAYATHU VEEDU, KOVOOR, ARINALOOR POST, KOLLAM 14. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER CHAVARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SHRI BENJANIN PAUL FOR R1 TO R3 & R14 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI JJ. ----------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 19755 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 1st DAY OF JULY, 2008 J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner is the Manager of Kovoor Upper Primary School, Arinalloor Post, Kollam District. He has been directed, inter alia, by the Assistant Educational Officer, Chavara by Exhibit P1 communication dated 21.2.2008 to construct a compound wall to protect the school compound. When the petitioner attempted to construct the compound wall, respondents 4 to 13 came forward and obstructed the construction. They are claiming right to use the school compound as a pathway to reach their residential houses from the nearby road. They have filed a complaint regarding the construction of compound wall denying their right of way before the Assistant Educational Officer. The said Officer has forwarded a copy of that complaint to the petitioner, along with Exhibit P2 covering letter. The petitioner submits, he has got a statutory duty to construct the compound wall as per the provisions of the Kerala Education Rules. According to him, no one can claim any easementary right over the ground belonging to the school and even if they used it for some time as pathway they cannot get right over the school ground. According to the petitioner, he has never permitted them to use the ground as a pathway W.P.(C)No.19755/008 -2- and they have never used it also. Confronted with the alleged unlawful obstruction of the compound wall, the petitioner has preferred Exhibit P3 petition before the police, seeking protection. The petitioner also points out that none of the obstructors is a neighbouring land owner and therefore they cannot have any boundary dispute with his school. Since, the police did not extend any helping hand, this writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs. (i) Issue a writ of prohibition or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing respondents 1 to 3 to afford adequate police protection for the construction of the compound wall in 1.30 acres of property in Re.Sy.No.488/17, 488/18 and 473/8 of Mynagappally village wherein Kovoor Upper Primary School is located. (ii) Issue a writ of prohibition or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing respondents 1 to 3 to grant adequate police protection to the petitioner and the workers for constructing a compound wall in 1.30 acres of property in Re.Sy.No.488/17, 488/18 and 473/8 of Mynagappally village wherein Kovoor Upper Primary School is located. (iii) Issue an interim direction directing respondents 1 to 3 to afford adequate police protection for the construction of the compound wall in 1.30 acres of property in Re.Sy.No.488/17, 488/18 and 473/8 of W.P.(C)No.19755/008 -3- Mynagappally village wherein Kovoor Upper Primary School is located. 2. Going through the pleadings and materials in the writ petition, we find that respondents 4 to 13 are claiming a right of way through the compound of the school. In paragraph 3 of the writ petition, the petitioner has pleaded as follows: “ But the contention of respondents 4 to 13 is that they have got a right of way through the ground of the school. It appears that they have filed a representation dated nil before the Assistant Educational Officer and the Assistant Educational Officer forwarded the same to the petitioner as per a communication dated 25.4.2008 and a true copy of the same is produced herewith marked as Exhibit P2.” He has also stated in Exhibit P3 representation before the police that the said respondents are raising untenable claim for right of way through the school's property and they are threatening and obstructing the petitioner and his workers. From the above pleadings, it is clear that the respondents 4 to 13 are causing obstruction of the compound wall, claiming a right of way through the school's property. Whether that claim is genuine or tenable is not a matter which can be decided by this Court. While exercising the power of judicial review, this Court is concerned with the illegal actions and orders W.P.(C)No.19755/008 -4- of the State apart from those of inferior courts and Tribunals and not with the actions of the private parties. This Court cannot adjudicate on the dispute between two private parties in this jurisdiction. The police also do not have the power to consider the dispute between the petitioner and the aforementioned respondents, render a finding in his favour and thereafter render protection to the petitioner based on that finding. In the absence of any duty vested in the police in this regard, this Court in exercise of its power to issue a writ of mandamus cannot issue any direction to the police as prayed for by the petitioner. The remedy of the petitioner lies else where. He can move the competent civil court and seek appropriate reliefs. In view of the above position, the Writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the contentions of the petitioner and his right to move other forums for appropriate reliefs. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn