IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 34488 of 2010(I)
1. KUMARATHANDAR SASIDHARAN THANDAR,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. HARIKUMAR, S/O.CHALLAPPAN NAIR,
... Respondent
2. THANKAPPAN, S/O.DIVAKARAN,
3. ANI, D/O.RAMAN THIRUMULPADU,
4. UNNIKRISHNAN, S/O.GANGAN NAIR,
5. SHAJAN, S/O.SADANANDACHARI,
6. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.JOSHI N.THOMAS
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :22/11/2010
O R D E R
K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.
------------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.34488 of 2010-I
----------------------------------------------
Dated, this the 22nd day of November, 2010
J U D G M E N T
K.M.Joseph, J.
Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the
following reliefs:
“i) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate
writ or order or direction commanding the 6th respondent to
afford adequate and effective police protection to the life
and property of the petitioner.
ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ
or order or direction commanding the 6th respondent to
proceed against respondents 1 to 5 in accordance with law
who committed criminal trespass and committed waste into
the property of the petitioner and threatened the petitioner
and members of his family endangering their life.”
2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as
follows: Petitioner is a retired government employee. He was
granted Ext.P2 pattayam for 45 cents vide Ext.P1 proceedings
of the Land Tribunal,Cherthala. Petitioner gifted 11.25 cents
to the Thiruvenkidapura Sri.Krishnaswamy Kshetra Bhajna
Samithy. It is stated that two years after the pattayam, one
WPC 34488/2010 -2-
Purushothaman Namboodiri claiming to be legal heir of
original owner filed appeal. The appeal was allowed and the
matter was remanded. Petitioner had approached this Court
by filing writ petition. This court vide Exts.P3 and P4 orders
stayed the operation of the order of the appellate authority.
While so, respondents 1 and 5 claiming to be the office
bearers of Thiruvenkidapura Sri.Krishnaswamy Temple
Committee trespassed into the property of the petitioner and
cut the trees and threatened the petitioner and members of
his family with dire consequences by stating that the entire
property belong to the temple.
3. We heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner. We are of the view that this may not be an
appropriate case for this Court to entertain the writ petition
under Article 226 and to direct protection to be granted. We
feel that petitioner has got alternate remedy by taking
appropriate steps before the competent Civil Court against the
party respondents. We also take notice of the pendency of
proceedings which we have referred to. Accordingly, we
relegate the petitioner to approach the competent Civil Court
WPC 34488/2010 -3-
in the matter. Without prejudice to the same the writ petition
stands dismissed.
(K.M.JOSEPH)
JUDGE.
(M.C.HARI RANI)
JUDGE.
MS