IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 29374 of 2010(V)
1. THOMAS JOHN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. K.C.JOHN, S/O.CHACKO, AGED 62
... Respondent
2. SAJI O.K, S/O.KUNJUKUNJU, AGED 37
3. SAM JOSEPH, AGED 35
4. ROBINSON ABRAHAM, AGED 42
5. BABU MATHEW, AGED 44,S/O.MATHAI PATHROSE
6. LAIJU, AGED 42, S/O.PATHROSE
7. SAJI V.Y, AGED 41 YEARS
8. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
9. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM
10. DYSP OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM
11. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
12. S.I.OF POLICE, CHINGAVANAM, KOTTAYAM.
For Petitioner :SRI.K.SABU
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :23/09/2010
O R D E R
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