W.P.(C) Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K. NARENDRAN`** ## **`&`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G. GIRISH`** ``` TUESDAY, THE 23[RD] DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 3RD MAGHA, 1945 ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 12442 OF 2016 ``` ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` CHANDRADATHAN AGED 52 YEARS SON OF NARAYANAN, AGED 52,RESIDING AT ERIYELIL HOUSE,THIRUVALOOR, ALUVA, ALANGAD.P.O.,PIN-683 511. ``` ``` BY ADVS. SRI.T.B.THANKAPPAN SRI.ASHISH VIDYADHARAN SRI.T.T.HARIKUMAR ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** - **`1 THIRUVALOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,OFFICE OF THE ALANGAD PANCHAYATH,NEERICODE.P.O., PIN-683 511.`** - **`2 THIRUVALOOR KSHETRA UPADESAKA SAMITHI REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,THIRUVALOOR MAHADEVA TEMPLE,ALUVA, ALANGAD.P.O., PIN-683 511.`** - **`3 ADDL.R3 RAJESH M.P`** - **`S/O PADMANABHAN, AGED 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT MANOMKANNEZHATHU HOUSE, TIRUVALUR, ALANGAD PO, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN683511.`** - **`4 ADDL.R4 DEEPA GEOFFREY W/O GEOFFREY, AGED 41 YEARS, RESIDING AT PALLATHU VEEDU, TIRUVALUR, ALANGAD P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683511. (ADDL.R3 AND R4 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 08/10/2018 IN IA.04/2018)`** - **`5 ADDL.R5.TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NATHANCODE, KAWDIAR POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 003.`** - **`6 ADDL.R6.EXECUTIVE OFFICER, THIRUVALOOR MAHADEVA TEMPLE, ALUVA, ALANGAD P.O, PIN 683`** 2 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 ``` 511. ADDL.R5 AND R6 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 15/07/2019 IN I.A.NO.3/2019. ``` ``` SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND CONSERVANCY), 7*. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003 ``` ``` 8** TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, FIRST FLOOR, ABOVE SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, POLICE STATION ROAD, NORTH PARAVUR-683513 ``` ``` TALUK SURVEYOR, TALUK OFFICE, 9*** NORTH PARAVUR-683513 ``` ``` ADDL.R7 TO R9 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 23.01.2024 IN W.P.(C)NO.12442 OF 2016. ``` ``` BY ADVS. SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, SC, TDB SRI.P.S.APPU SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE SRI.P.PRIJITH SRI.S.SREEKUMAR SR. SRI.THOMAS P.KURUVILLA ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.01.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).12265/2023 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 3 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 ``` IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM ``` ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K. NARENDRAN ``` ## **`&`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G. GIRISH`** ``` TUESDAY, THE 23[RD] DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 3RD MAGHA, 1945 ``` ``` WP(C) NO.5582 OF 2021 ``` ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` 1 RATHEESH A.C. AGED 53 YEARS PRESIDENT, TEMPLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, EZHUVACHIRA HOUSE, EZHALLOOR P.O., THIRUVALOOR, ALANGAD P.O., ALUVA-683 511 2 A.M.UDAYAN, NEDUMPALLI AANACHAAL, THATHAPPALLY P.O., NORTH PARAVUR - 683 520 ``` ``` BY ADVS. R.KRISHNA RAJ E.S.SONI KUMARI SANGEETHA S.NAIR ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** - **`1 TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003`** - **`2 ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NORTH PARAVUR-683 513`** - **`3 SUB-GROUP OFFICER, THIRUVALOOR DEVASWOM, NORTH PARAVUR-683 513`** - **`4 THE SECRETARY, ALANGAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH, ALANGAD P.O-683 502`** - **`5 ADDL.R5.CHANDRADATHAN S/O.LATE NARAYANAN, AGED 58 YEARS, ERIYELIL HOUSE, THRIVALOOR, PARAVUR TALUK [ADDL.R5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 07.04.2021 IN I.A.1/2021 IN WP(C)5582/2021].`** 4 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 ``` BY ADVS. SRI.G.SANTHOSH KUMAR (P). SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN T.B.THANKAPPAN T.T.HARIKUMAR ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.01.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).12265/2023 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 5 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 ``` IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM ``` ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K. NARENDRAN ``` ``` & ``` ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G. GIRISH`** ``` TUESDAY, THE 23[RD] DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 3RD MAGHA, 1945 ``` ``` W.P.(C)NO.12265OF 2023 ``` ## **`PETITIONER:`** ## **`TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD`** ``` REP. BY IT'S SECRETARY, DEVASWOM HEAD QUARTERS, NANDANCODE, KOWDIAR.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695003 ``` ``` BY ADV G.SANTHOSH KUMAR (P). ``` |**`RESPONDENTS:`**|**`RESPONDENTS:`**| |---|---| |**`1`**|**`STATE OF KERALA`**| ||**`REP.BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (DEVASWOM) DEPARTMENT,`**| ||**`GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM, PIN - 695001`**| |**`2`**|**`STATION HOUSE OFFICER`**| ||**`ALUVA WEST POLICE STATION, KOTTAPURAM, ALANGAD P.O., PIN -`**| ||**`683511`**| |**`3`**|**`ALANGAD BRAHMANA SAMOOHAM`**| ||**`THIRUVALOOR, ALANGAD P.O., ALUVA, REP. BY IT'S SECRETARY`**| ||**`STHANUNATHAN, PIN - 683511`**| |**`4`**|**`ADDL.R4: THE ALANGAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT,`**| ||**`REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ALANGAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT`**| ||**`OFFICE, ALANGAD, ERANAKULAM, PIN: 683 511 (IS IMPLEADED AS`**| ||**`PER ORDER DATED 05/04/2023 IN IA 1/23)`**| ||**`ADDL.R5: CHANDRADATHAN,`**| |**`5`**|**`S/O. LATE NARAYANAN, AGED 60 YEARS, ERIYELIL HOUSE,`**| ||**`THRIVALOOR, ALANGAD P.O., PARAVUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT`**| ||**`- 683 511 (IS IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DATED 30.06.2023 IN IA`**| ||**`2/23)`**| 6 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 ``` SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND CONSERVANCY), TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANTHANCODE, 6* THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003 ``` - **`7** TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, FIRST FLOOR, ABOVE SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, POLICE STATION ROAD, NORTH PARAVUR-683513`** - **`8**`** ``` TALUK SURVEYOR, TALUK OFFICE, NORTH PARAVUR-683513 ``` ``` ADDL.R6 TO R8 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 23.01.2024 IN ``` ``` W.P.(C)NO.12265 OF 2023. ``` ``` BY ADVS. KUMAR A DINESH MATHEW J MURIKAN T.B.THANKAPPAN P.J.ANILKUMAR(K/265/1988) G.MINI(1748)(K/1748/1995) P.S.SREE PRASAD(K/1181/2009) JOB ABRAHAM (MAH/006468/2007) T.T.HARIKUMAR ``` ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` SRI S.RAJMOHAN – SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER ``` ``` SRI.G. SANTHOSH KUMAR – SC, TDB ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.01.2024, ALONG WITH DBP.4/2019, 5582/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 7 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K. NARENDRAN ``` ``` & ``` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G. GIRISH ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 23[RD] DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 3RD MAGHA, 1945 ``` ``` DBP NO.4 OF 2019 ``` ``` IN THE MATTER OF TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD – REPORT NO.4 OF 2019 IN COMPLAINT NO.143 OF 2017 – COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE TEMPLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, THIRUVALOOR MAHA DEVA KSHETHRAM – PARAVOOR GROUP – SUO MOTU PROCEEDINGS INITIATED – REGARDING. ``` ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` TEMPLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE THIRUVALOOR MAHA DEVA KSHETHRAM, THIRUVALOOR, ALANGADU P.O., 683 511, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** |**`1`**|**`THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER`**| |---|---| ||**`TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.`**| |**`2`**|**`THE SECRETARY`**| ||**`TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.`**| |**`3`**|**`THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,`**| ||**`TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, KOTTAYAM.`**| |**`4`**|**`THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER`**| ||**`PWD ROADS DIVISION, ERNAKULAM, THRIKKAKKARA, PIN- 682 021`**| |**`5`**|**`ALANGADU PANCHAYAT`**| ||**`REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY`**| |**`6`**|**`ADDL.R6.CHANDRADATHAN`**| ||**`AGED 55 YEARS`**| ||**`S/O.LATE NARAYANAN,ERIYELIL HOUSE, THRIVALOOR, ALANGAD`**| ||**`P.O., PARAVUR TALUK IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED`**| ||**`25.02.2019 IN IA 1/2019`**| 8 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 ``` 7 TAHASILDAR, PARAVOOR IMPLEADED AS ADDL. R7 AS PER ORDER DATED 10.03.2020 IN DBP 4/2019 ``` ``` BY ADVS. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, SC, TDB SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN T.B.THANKAPPAN SRI.T.T.HARIKUMAR SRI.ASHISH VIDYADHARAN SMT.K.S.SREEJA SHRI.DIPIN DILEEP ``` ``` OTHER PRESENT: ``` ``` SRI S.RAJMOHAN – SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER ``` ``` SRI.P. RAMACHANDRAN - AMICUS CURIAE FOR OMBUDSMAN ``` ``` THIS DEVASWOM BOARD PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.01.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).12265/2023 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 9 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 ## **JUDGMENT/ORDER** ## **Anil K. Narendran, J.** The issue raised in the writ petitions and the DBP centers around the property of Thiruvaloor Sree Mahadeva Temple comprised in Sy.No.437/6 (old Sy.No.437/10) of Alangad Village covered by Ext.P1 settlement register in W.P.(C)No.12265 of 2023. 2. W.P.(C)No.12442 of 2016:- The petitioner, who is a resident of Thiruvaloor, has filed this writ petition, invoking the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 1[st] respondent Alangad Grama Panchayat to install a board on the road in Sy.No.437/6 of Alangad Village, stating that it is a public road and those who cause obstruction to the user of the same will be prosecuted; to direct the 1[st] respondent Grama Panchayat to initiate legal action including prosecution against those who cause obstruction or doing anything detrimental to the interest of public in the matter of using Meppalam Colony Road for ingress and egress, when such action is brought to the notice of the Panchayat; a writ of mandamus commanding the 1[st] respondent to act upon Ext.P7 representation made by the local residents, including the petitioner, and remove the obstruction 10 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 caused by 2[nd] respondent Thiruvaloor Kshethra Upadesaka Samithi on the Panchayat Road, within such time frame, as this Court may fix, in the circumstances of the case. 2.1. On 31.03.2016, when this writ petition came up for admission, this Court admitted the matter on file and issued notice to the respondents. By the order dated 19.06.2018 in I.A.No.10269 of 2018, Exts.P9 and P10 were accepted as additional documents. By the order dated 08.10.2018 in I.A.No.4 of 2018 additional respondents 3 and 4 were impleaded. By the order dated 22.11.2018 in I.A.No.5 of 2018, Ext.P11 was accepted as an additional document. By the order dated 14.12.2018 in I.A.No.6 of 2018, Ext.P12 was accepted as an additional document. By the order dated 15.01.2019 in I.A.No.1 of 2019, Exts.P13 to P15 were accepted as additional documents. By the order dated 15.07.2019 in I.A.No.3 of 2019, additional respondents 5 and 6 were impleaded and the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board entered appearance for those respondents. 2.2. The 1[st] respondent has filed a counter affidavit dated 20.06.2016, opposing the reliefs sought for in this writ petition. The 2[nd] respondent filed a counter affidavit dated 11.07.2018, producing therewith Exts.R2(a) to R2(c). The 5[th] respondent has 11 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 filed a counter affidavit dated 27.07.2023, producing therewith Exts.R5(a) to R5(6). 3. W.P.(C)No.5582 of 2021:- The petitioners, who are devotees of Thiruvaloor Sree Mahadeva Temple, have filed this writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 1[st] respondent Travancore Devaswom Board to take appropriate steps to see that the property having an extent of 30 cents in Sy.No.437/6 of Alangad Village and properties having an extent of 72 cents situated in Sy.Nos.437/7/13, 437/7/14, 437/8 and 437/9 of Alangad Village are protected and secured without encroachment; a writ of mandamus restraining the 4[th] respondent Secretary, Alangad Grama Panchayat from encroaching into the property of the Devaswom having an extent of 30 cents situated in Sy.No.437/6 and 72 cents of property situated in Sy.Nos.437/7/13, 437/7/14, 437/8 and 437/9 of Alangad Village and making any construction without the permission of the Devaswom Board; a writ of mandamus commanding the Alangad Grama Panchayat to remove the constructions already made in the Devaswom land and to pay the Devaswom the value of the soil already removed from the Devaswom land. 3.1. On 03.03.2021, when this writ petition came up for 12 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 admission, this Court admitted the matter on file. The learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board took notice before admission for respondents 1 to 3. Notice before admission was ordered to the 4[th] respondent Secretary, Alangad Grama Panchayat, by special messenger, returnable within three days. This Court granted an interim order on 03.03.2021. Paragraphs 3 and 4 of that order read thus; “3. In view of the stand taken by the respondent Travancore Devaswom Board in Ext.P10 letter dated 22.02.2021 addressed to the 4[th] respondent Secretary of the Alangad Grama Panchayat, it is ordered that the 4[th] respondent Grama Panchayat will immediately stop all further constructions referred to in Ext.P10, so long as it is carried on by them before the permission of the respondent Travancore Devaswom Board in the properties having an extent of 30 cents situated in Sy. No.437/6 and 72 cents situated in Sy.Nos.437/7/13, 437/7/14, 437/8 and 437/9 of Alangad Village. The abovesaid interim direction will be in force for a period of three weeks. 4. The learned Standing Counsel for the Travancore Devaswom Board will also get instructions as to whether the survey numbers of the subject properties mentioned in the prayer portion of this W.P.(C) as well as in the interim portion of this W.P.(C) are correct and refers to the subject property covered by Ext.P10, etc.” 3.2. By the order dated 07.04.2021 in I.A.No.1 of 2021, 13 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 Chandradathan, the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.12442 of 2016, got himself impleaded as the additional 5[th] respondent. The 4[th] respondent has filed a counter affidavit 12.03.2021, producing therewith Exts.R4(a) to R4(h). The petitioners have filed a reply affidavit dated 07.04.2021 to the counter affidavit filed by the 4[th] respondent. The 5[th] respondent filed a counter affidavit dated 07.04.2021, producing therewith Exts.R5(a) to R5(u). Respondents 1 to 3 have filed a counter affidavit dated 07.04.2021, opposing the reliefs sought for in this writ petition. 4. W.P.(C)No.12265 of 2023:- The Travancore Devaswom Board has filed this writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 2[nd] respondent Station House Officer, Aluva West Police Station to ensure that appropriate steps are taken to remove the encroachments made by the 3[rd] respondent Alangad Brahmana Samooham in the property owned by Thiruvaloor Sree Mahadeva Temple, situated in Sy.Nos.437/6 and 437/10 of Alangad Village. The petitioner has also sought for a declaration that the encroachment made by the 3[rd] respondent Alangad Brahmana Samooham over the Devaswom property of Thiruvaloor Sree Mahadeva Temple is illegal. 4.1. On 05.04.2023, when this writ petition came up for 14 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 consideration, this Court directed that the Secretary of the Alangad Grama Panchayat shall be personally present in Court along with the files relating to the building permit granted to the 3[rd] respondent Alangad Brahmana Samooham, as seen in Ext.P4 photographs. The learned Senior Government Pleader was directed to get instructions from the 2[nd] respondent Station House Officer, Aluva West Police Station. 5. DBP No.4 of 2019:- This DBP is registered based on TDB Report No.4 of 2019 of the learned Ombudsman in Complaint No.143 of 2017. The report of the learned Ombudsman reads thus; “The above matter relates to Thiruvaloor Maha Deva Temple in Paravoor Group. The TAC had pointed out that on the western main entrance of the temple in Survey No.437/6 of an extent of 30 cents of land, a road has been constructed by the Government in an unscientific manner, as a result of which, the road is on a higher level to the Gopuram. Hence, there is water stagnation in front of the main door to the temple and causes serious hardship to the devotees in entering the temple through the water-logged portion just in front of the door. The Tantri is stated to have opined that it may affect the ‘Chaithanya’ of the temple. Copy of the complaint is marked as Annexure O1. Though the devotees of the temple had given a mass petition to the Board, but no steps are taken and hence this petition for direction to take appropriate steps to abate the nuisance caused. The case was started in 2017. Various proceedings were issued and 15 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 the matter was posted on different days. It may not be necessary to go back to the history in this regard. 2. Now, finally, the Board has accorded administrative sanction at an estimated cost of Rs.6,65,000/- for the above work in the Thiruvaloor Devaswom in Paravur Group to abate the nuisance caused due to water stagnation in front of the main entrance during rainy season. Copy of the Board order dated 04.01.2019 is marked as Annexure O2. 3. The Executive Engineer, TDB, Kottayam filed a reply dated 25.10.2017, copy of which is marked as Annexure O3. The Executive Engineer, PWD, Road Division, Ernakulam filed a reply dated 17.02.2018 suggesting the manner in which the nuisance could be abated. Copy of the said reply is marked as Annexure O4. 4. I have personally visited the site when the Engineer of the PWD as well as the AE, TDB and the TAC Members were present. In the discussion, it was stated by the PWD that the road constructed by them does not belong to them and they have no objection in the repairs to be done by the Devaswom or the TAC. A copy of the proceedings issued on 19.02.2018 is marked as Annexure O5. Since this is a panchayat area and to avert future disputes, proceedings dated 19.09.2018 was issued regarding the pendency of the proceedings to the Alangadu Panchayat as well. Copy of the said proceedings is marked as Annexure O6. There is no response from them. In view of Annexure O2 Board Order, the Travancore Devadswom Board may be directed by the Honourable High Court to start the work immediately without further delay and to complete the same at an early date before the commencement of the next monsoon season.” 16 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 5.1. On 11.02.2019, when this DBP came up for consideration, this Court issued urgent notice to the complainant as well as the 5[th] respondent Alangad Grama Panchayat by speed post returnable within ten days. The learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board and also the learned Government Pleader were directed to get instructions. Registry was directed to list the matter along with W.P.(C)No.12442 of 2016. 6. On 11.04.2023, when the writ petitions, along with the DBP, came up for consideration, in terms of the directions contained in the order dated 05.04.2023 in W.P.(C)No.12265 of 2023, the Secretary of the Alangad Grama Panchayat was personally in Court, who sought time to produce the relevant files relating to the building permit granted to the Alangad Brahmana Samooham. The learned Senior Government Pleader submitted that the written instructions received from the Station House Officer, Aluva West Police Station shall be placed on record along with a memo. 7. On 12.04.2023, the learned Senior Government Pleader has placed on record the written instructions received from the Station House Officer, Aluva West Police Station. The Secretary of Alangad Grama Panchayat has made available for the 17 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 perusal of this Court the files relating to the building permit granted to the Alangad Brahmana Samooham. 8. On 30.09.2023, when these matters came up for consideration, this Court passed a detailed order in W.P.(C)No.12265 of 2023. Paragraphs 5 to 10 of that order read thus; “5. This writ petition along with connected matters are listed today based on the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board that the additional 4[th] respondent-Alangad Grama Panchayat proposes to conduct Keralothsavam-2023 in the Devaswom land of Thiruvalloor Sree Mahadeva Temple covered by Ext.P1 settlement register, which consists of 30 cents of land in Sy.No.437/6 of Alangad Village and another extent of 4.51 Acres in Old Sy.No.437/10. The learned Standing Counsel would submit that in the 4.51 Acres of land, there is a stage constructed by the Travancore Devaswom Board. 6. Two photographs of the Devaswom land having an extent of 4.51 Acres in Old Sy.No.437/10 of Alangad Village, which is placed on record as Ext.R5(u)(3) along with the counter affidavit filed in the connected matter, i.e., W.P.(C)No.5582 of 2021, by the additional 5[th] respondent therein, who is arrayed as the 5[th] respondent in this writ petition, are reproduced hereunder; 18 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 **==> picture [299 x 164] intentionally omitted <==** **==> picture [298 x 206] intentionally omitted <==** 7. The learned Standing Counsel for additional 4[th] respondent Alangad Grama Panchayat seeks time to get instructions. 8. The Travancore Devaswom Board is a Trustee in management of the properties vested in the Deity, i.e., Devaswom properties, which is legally bound to perform its duties with utmost care and caution. 9. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in **A.A.** ## **Gopalakrishnan v. Cochin Devaswom Board [(2007) 7** **SCC 482]** the properties of the Deities, temples and Devaswom Boards are required to be protected and safeguarded by their trustees/archakas/shebaits/employees. 19 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 It is also the duty of the courts to protect and safeguard the properties of religious institutions and charitable institutions from wrongful claims or misappropriations. In **Travancore Devaswom Board v. Mohanan Nair [2013 (3) KLT 132]** after reiterating the law laid down by the Apex Court in **A.A. Gopalakrishnan [(2007) 7 SCC 482]** it was held that the court is the guardian of Deity, which is always treated similar to that of a minor. The court is having inherent jurisdiction in such matters and the doctrine of _parens patriae_ will also apply in exercising the jurisdiction. 10. Having considered the submissions made at the Bar, we deem it appropriate to restrain 4[th] respondent Alangad Grama Panchayat from conducting any activities in connection with Keralothsavam-2023 in the Devaswom land of Thiruvalloor Sree Mahadeva Temple, having an extent of 4.51 Acres of land in Old Sy.No.437/10 of Alangad Village covered by Ext.P1 settlement register. The 2[nd] respondent Station House Officer is directed to ensure strict compliance of this order.” 9. The order dated 30.09.2023 was followed by the order dated 03.10.2023 in W.P.(C)No.12265 of 2023, which reads thus; “On 30.09.2023, when this writ petition along with connected matters came up for consideration, this Court passed an interim order restraining the 4[th] respondent Alangad Grama Panchayat from conducting any activities in connection with Keralothsavam-2023 in the Devaswom land of Thiruvalloor Sree Mahadeva Temple, having an extent of 4.51 Acres of land in Old Sy.No.437/10 of Alangad Village covered by Ext.P1 settlement register. The 2[nd] respondent Station House 20 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 Officer, Aluva West Police Station was directed to ensure strict compliance of that order. 2. Today, when this matter is taken up for consideration, the learned Senior Government Pleader, on instructions from the 2[nd] respondent Station House Officer would submit that though Alangad Grama Panchayat has decided to conduct cultural and sports events in connection with Keralothsavam2023 in the Devaswom land referred to hereinbefore, based on the complaint made by the Devawom Board, the President and Secretary of the Grama Panchayat were informed that no such activity can be permitted in the Devaswom land. Accordingly, they agreed to conduct such activities in the Alangad Kottappuram KEMH School Ground and it was conducted in that place. 3. Having considered the submissions made at the bar, we deem it appropriate to direct the 4[th] respondent to file an affidavit explaining the facts and circumstances, which shall be placed on record within ten days.” 10. On 19.10.2023, this Court passed another order in ## W.P.(C)No.12265 of 2023, which reads thus; “In terms of the directions contained in the order dated 03.10.2023, the Secretary of the 4[th] respondent-Grama Panchayat has filed an affidavit dated 13.10.2023. The fact that an attempt was made by the organizing committee formed at the instance of the Grama Panchayat to conduct activities in connection with Keralothsavam 2023 in the Devaswom land having an extent of 4.51 Acres in Old Survey No.437/10 of Alangad Village covered by Ext.P1 settlement register stands admitted in the said affidavit. Devaswom 21 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 lands cannot be permitted to be used for such activities at the instance of the Local Self Government Institution. We strongly deprecate the conduct of the 4[th] respondent-Grama Panchayat in this regard and restrained the Grama Panchayat from conducting any such activities in future in the Devaswom land.” 11. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner in the respective writ petitions, the learned Senior Government Pleader, the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board, the learned counsel for Alangad Grama Panchayat, the learned counsel for the Temple Advisory Committee of Thiruvaloor Sree Mahadeva Temple and also the respective counsel for the party respondents. 12. 'Deva' means God and 'swom' means ownership in Sanskrit and the term 'Devaswom' denotes the property of God in common parlance. [see: **Prayar Gopalakrishnan and another v. State of Kerala and others** - **2018 (1) KHC 536]** 13. In **A.A. Gopalakrishnan v. Cochin Devaswom Board [(2007) 7 SCC 482]** a Three-Judge Bench of the Apex Court held that the properties of deities, temples and Devaswom Boards are required to be protected and safeguarded by their trustees/archakas/shebaits/employees. Instances are many where persons entrusted with the duty of managing and 22 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 safeguarding the properties of temples, deities and Devaswom Boards have usurped and misappropriated such properties by setting up false claims of ownership or tenancy, or adverse possession. This is possible only with the passive or active collusion of the authorities concerned. Such acts of ‘fences eating the crops’ should be dealt with sternly. The Government, members or trustees of boards/trusts, and devotees should be vigilant to prevent any such usurpation or encroachment. It is also the duty of courts to protect and safeguard the properties of religious and charitable institutions from wrongful claims or misappropriation. 14. In **A.A. Gopalakrishnan** , on the facts of the case on hand, the Apex Court noticed that, when Respondents 3 to 5 claimed ownership of Survey No.1043, which was the front portion of the temple premises in the possession of the temple (in the proposal for settlement dated 06.07.2000), the Devaswom Board, instead of investigating and verifying as to how they could claim ownership over temple property, strangely agreed for a settlement under which the temple was to get Sy.No.1043 (which was a temple land already in its possession), in exchange for giving away another temple land (Sy.No.1042/2) to Respondents 3 to 5. The Board Resolution dated 29.08.2000 agreeing for the settlement 23 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 proposal clearly records that Sy.No.1043 is already in the possession of the temple. Before the Apex Court, respondents 3 and 4 contended that the settlement in the suit (O.S.No.399 of 1998) was validly arrived at between them (the plaintiffs) and the Devaswom Board (the defendant), that the Devaswom Board had considered the proposal after taking legal advice and had duly passed a resolution to settle the suit. It was further contended that a decree having been made in terms of the compromise and such decree having attained finality, it cannot be questioned, interfered or set aside at the instance of a third party in a writ proceeding. They relied on the provisons of Order XXIII, Rule 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which provides that no suit shall lie to set aside a decree on the ground that the compromise on which the decree is based was not lawful. The Apex Court held that, the bar contained in Order XXIII, Rule 3A will not come in the way of the High Court examining the validity of a compromise decree, when allegations of fraud/collusion are made against a statutory authority which entered into such compromise. While it is true that decrees of civil courts which have attained finality should not be interfered with lightly, challenge to such compromise decrees by an aggrieved devotee, who was not a 24 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 party to the suit, cannot be rejected, where fraud/collusion on the part of officers of a statutory board is made out. Further, when the High Court by the order dated 09.09.1998 had directed the Board to take possession of Sy.No.1042/2 immediately from Respondents 3 and 4 in CDB No.3 of 1996, in a complaint by another devotee, it was improper for the Board to enter into a settlement with Respondents 2 and 3, giving up the right, title and interest in Sy.No.1042/2, without the permission of the court which passed such order. The Apex Court concluded that, viewed from any angle, the compromise decree cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside. ## 15. In **Travancore Devaswom Board v. Mohanan Nair** **[2013 (3) KLT 132]** a Division Bench of this Court noticed that in **A.A. Gopalakrishnan [(2007) 7 SCC 482]** the Apex Court emphasised that it is the duty of the courts to protect and safeguard the interest and properties of the religious and charitable institutions. The relevant principles under the Hindu law will show that the Deity is always treated similar to that of a minor and there are some points of similarity between a minor and a Hindu idol. The High Court therefore is the guardian of the Deity and apart from the jurisdiction under Section 103 of the Land 25 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 Reforms Act, 1957 viz. the powers of revision, the High Court is having inherent jurisdiction and the doctrine of parents patriae will also apply in exercising the jurisdiction. Therefore, when a complaint has been raised by the Temple Advisory Committee, which was formed by the devotees of the Temple, about the loss of properties of the Temple itself, the truth of the same can be gone into by the High Court in these proceedings. 16. In **Mohanan Nair** the Division Bench relied on the decision in **Achuthan Pillai v. State of Kerala [1970 KLT 838]** , wherein a Full Bench of this Court considered the validity of an order passed by the Government under Section 99 of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951. By the said order the Government cancelled the sanction given for transfer of immovable property of a Devaswom. The initial order, i.e., Ext.P1 order was passed by the Commissioner for sanction to lease 600 acres of forest land belonging to Emoor Bhagavathy Devaswom. The said order was passed in the year 1960 and the Government cancelled the same by Ext.P5 order dated 23.02.1967. The Full Bench traced the principles regarding the rights of an authority to protect the institution like Devaswom in order to prevent fraud. The Full Bench held that the power to cancel a sanction and 26 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 thereby to make null and void an improvident transfer or alienation of immovable property of a Devaswom, though exercised under the guise of revision, is visitorial in character. It is a matter of common knowledge that even from very early times religious and charitable institutions in India came under the special protection of the ruling authority. The rulers of the country always asserted their right to visit these institutions in order to prevent fraud and redress the abuses in their management. In the celebrated **Rameswar Pagoda case [(1874) 1 Ind App 209]** it was pointed out by the Judicial Committee that the former rulers of this country always asserted the right to visit endowments of this kind to prevent and redress the abuses in their management. The authorities, therefore, support the conclusion that supervision and control of Hindu Religious and Charitable Institutions is a function of government and that Government at all times asserted and exercised the power. The fact that Government did not exercise the power immediately when it became aware of the circumstances vitiating Ext.P1 order cannot prejudice the interest of the Devaswom. If the contention of the petitioner were to prevail, it would mean that because the Government was not very vigilant in exercising the power the interest of the Devaswom 27 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 should suffer. Section 10 of the Limitation Act, 1963, provides no period of limitation for a suit against a person in whom the trust property has become vested for any specific purpose or against his legal representatives or assigns for the purpose of following in his or their hands such property. The reason behind the section is that an express trust ought not suffer by the misfeasance or nonfeasance of a trustee. ## 17. In **Mrinalini Padhi v. Union of India [2018 SCC** **OnLine SC 667]** - order dated 05.07.2018 in W.P.(C)No.649 of 2018 - the Apex Court noticed that the issue of difficulties faced by the visitors, exploitative practices, deficiencies in the management, maintenance of hygiene, proper utilisation of offerings and protection of assets may require consideration with regard to all Shrines throughout the India, irrespective of religion practiced in such shrines. It cannot be disputed that this aspect is covered by List III Item 28 of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India and there is need to look into this aspect by the Central Government, apart from State Governments. Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 permits a court also to issue direction for making a scheme or making an arrangement for any charitable or religious institution. Accordingly, the Apex 28 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 Court directed that, if any devotee moves the jurisdictional District Judge throughout the India with any grievance on the above aspect, the District Judge may either himself/herself or by assigning the issue/ matter to any other court under his/her jurisdiction examine above aspects and if necessary send a report to the High Court. The High Court will consider these aspects in public interest, in accordance with law, and issue such judicial directions as becomes necessary having regard to individual fact situation. 18. In **Nandakumar v. District Collector and others [2018 (2) KHC 58]** a Division Bench of this Court noticed that the legal position has been made clear by the Apex Court as to the role to be played by the High Court in exercising the ‘parens patriae’ jurisdiction in **Gopalakrishnan v. Cochin Devaswom Board [(2007) 7 SCC 482]** . The said decision was referred to and relied on by a Division Bench of this Court in **Travancore Devaswom Board v. Mohanan Nair [2013 (3) KLT 132]** . In the said circumstances, the properties of the Devaswom, if at all encroached by anybody and if any assignment/conveyance has been effected without involvement of the Devaswom, securing ‘pattayam’ or such other deeds, the same cannot confer any right 29 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 upon the parties concerned, unless the title so derived is clear in all respects. There cannot be any dispute that the remedy to retrieve such property belonging to the Devaswom is by resorting to the course stipulated in the Kerala Land Conservancy Act, 1957. 19. In **A.A. Gopalakrishnan v. Secretary, Cochin Devaswom Board [2018 (3) KHC 549]** a Division Bench of this Court found that the task undertaken by the complainant to ensure that the property of the Devaswom is protected and preserved has ultimately brought out the plain truth that the said property was sought to be appropriated by strangers and that the property in Sy.No.1042/2 has been successfully retrieved by the Devaswom, based on the intervention made by this Court and also by the Apex Court [A.A. Gopalakrishnan - (2007) 7 SCC 482]. Proceedings have to be taken to a logical conclusion in respect of the land in Sy.No.1043 as well. This is more so since in view of the ‘parens patriae’ jurisdiction being entrusted with the Court in this regard and there is a duty cast upon the Court to take every step to ensure that the property of the deity is protected. 20. In **Payappar Sree Dharmasastha Temple A. Com.** **v. A.K. Joseph [(2009) 14 SCC 628]** it was contended before 30 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 the Apex Court that the Travancore Devaswom Board is a statutory body which came into being only by the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950 and before that, the Government and Devaswom were one and the same and there was no separate existence, and therefore, whatever order was passed by the Government prior to 1950 regarding the land in question, it was also binding upon the Board. It was also contended that Section 27 of the Act does not nullify any assignment by the Government before the Travancore Devaswom Board came into existence. As per Section 27, which deals with Devaswom properties, immovable properties entered or classed in the revenue records as ‘Devaswom Vaga’ or ‘Devaswom Poramboke’ and such other Pandaravaga lands as are in the possession or enjoyment of the Devaswoms mentioned in Schedule I after the 30[th] Meenam 1097 corresponding to 12.04.1922 shall be dealt with as Devaswom properties. The provisions of the Land Conservancy Act of 1091 shall be applicable to Devaswom lands as in the case of Government lands. After perusing the provisions under Section 27, which deals with Devaswom properties, the Apex Court noticed that after coming into force of the Act of 1950 the administration of temples and all their properties and funds, except Sree Padmanabhaswami 31 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 Temple got vested in the Travancore Devaswom Board. It is clearly mentioned in Section 27 that the immovable properties entered or classed in the revenue records as Devaswom property, which is in the possession or enjoyment of the Devaswom effective from 12.04.1922 shall be dealt with as Devaswom properties. The Apex Court held that the interpretation given by the High Court, so far as Section 27 of the Act is concerned, was incorrect as the High Court totally overlooked the fact that Section 27 of the Act - stipulates that immovable properties entered or classed in the rev enue records as ‘Devaswom Vaga’ or ‘Devaswom Poramboke’ after 12.04.1922 would be dealt with as Devaswom properties, whether or not the same Devaswom properties was the issue which was sought to be resolved and adjudicated by the High Court by looking into various documents which were placed on record. 21. In **Jayaprakashan K. v. State of Kerala and others** **[2023 (3) KHC SN 14 : 2023 (3) KLT 541]** a Division Bench of this Court, in which one among us (Anil K. Narendran, J.) was a party, noticed that in view of the provisions under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963, nothing in Chapter II (i.e., provisions regarding tenancies) shall apply to leases or tenancies of land referred to in clauses (i) to (xii) of the 32 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 said sub-section. As per clause (x) of sub-section (1) of Section 3, nothing in Chapter II shall apply to tenancies in respect of sites, tanks and premises of any temple, mosque or church (including sites belonging to a temple, mosque or church on which religious ceremonies are conducted) and sites of office buildings and other buildings attached to such temple, mosque or church, created by the owner, trustee or manager of such temple, mosque or church. In view of the provisions under sub-section (1) of Section 74, after the commencement of the Act, no tenancy shall be created in respect of any land. As per sub-section (2) of Section 74, any - tenancy created in contravention of the provisions of sub section (1) shall be invalid. In view of the provisions under sub-section (1) of Section 57, as soon as may be after the receipt of the application under Section 54, the Land Tribunal shall give notice to the landowner, the intermediaries and all other persons interested in the holding, to prefer claims or objections with regard to the application. As per sub-section (2) of Section 57, the land Tribunal shall, after considering the claims and objections received and hearing any person appearing in pursuance of the notice - issued under sub section (1) and after making due enquiries, pass orders - (i) on the application, if any, pending before it from the 33 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 landowner or intermediary for resumption in accordance with the provisions of Section 22; and (ii) on the application for purchase under Section 54. In view of the provisions under sub-section (1) of Section 72, on a date to be notified by the Government in this behalf in the Gazette, all right, title and interest of the landowners and intermediaries in respect of holdings held by cultivating tenants (including holders of kudiyiruppus and holders of karaimas) entitled to fixity of tenure under Section 13 and in respect of which certificates of purchase under sub-section (2) of Section 59 have not been issued, shall, subject to the provisions of this section, vest in the Government free from all encumbrances created by the landowners and intermediaries and subsisting thereon on the said date. In view of the provisions under sub-section (1) of Section 72B, the cultivating tenant of any holding or part of a holding, the right, title and interest in respect of which have vested in the Government under Section 72, shall be entitled to assignment of such right, title and interest. As per clause (a) to the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 72B, no cultivating tenant shall be entitled to assignment of the right, title and interest in respect of any holding or part of a holding under this section if he, or if he is a member of a family, such family, owns an extent of land not less 34 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 than the ceiling area. As per clause (b) to the proviso to subsection (1) of Section 72B, where the cultivating tenant or, if he is a member of a family, such family, does not own any land or owns an extent of land which is less than the ceiling area, he shall be entitled to the assignment of the right, title and interest in respect of only such extent of land as will, together with the land, if any, owned by him or his family, as the case may be, be equal to the ceiling area. In view of the provisions under sub-section (1) of Section 72BB, any landowner or intermediary whose right, title and interest in respect of any holding have vested in the Government may apply to the Land Tribunal for the assignment of such right, title and interest to the cultivating tenant and for the payment of the compensation due to him under Section 72A. As per Section 72C, notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (3) of Section 72B or Section 72BB, the Land Tribunal may, subject to such rules as may be made by the Government in this behalf, at any time after the vesting of the right, title and interest of the landowners and intermediaries in the Government under Section 72, assign such right, title and interest to the cultivating tenants entitled thereto, and the cultivating tenants shall be bound to accept such assignment. In view of the provisions under Section 35 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 72F, the Land Tribunal has to issue notices and determine the compensation and purchase price. As per sub-section (1) of Section 72F, as soon as may be after the right, title and interest of the landowner and the intermediaries, if any, in respect of a holding or part of a holding have vested in the Government under Section 72, or, where an application under Section 72B or Section 72BB has been received by the Land Tribunal, as soon as may be after the receipt of such application, the Land Tribunal shall publish or cause to be published a public notice in the prescribed form in such manner as may be prescribed, calling upon the landowner, the intermediaries, if any and cultivating tenant; and all other persons interested in the land, the right, title and interest in respect of which have vested in the Government, to prefer claims and objections, if any, within such time as may be specified in the notice and to appear before it on the date specified in the notice with all relevant records to prove their respective claims or in support of their objections. As per the mandate of sub-section (5) of Section 72F, the land Tribunal shall, after considering the claims and objections received in pursuance of the notice issued - - under sub section (1) or sub section (2) and the advice received from the village committee or village committees before the date 36 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 ## specified therefor and hearing any person appearing in pursuance of the notice issued under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) and after making due enquiries, pass an order specifying the matters enumerated in clauses (a) to (i) of sub-section (5). As per subsection (1) of Section 72K, as soon as may be after the determination of the purchase price under Section 72F or the passing of an order under sub-section (3) of Section 72MM the Land Tribunal shall issue a certificate of purchase to the cultivating tenant, and thereupon the right, title and interest of the landowner and the intermediaries, if any, in respect of the holding or part thereof to which the certificate relates, shall vest in the cultivating tenant free from all encumbrances created by the landowner or the intermediaries if any. 22. In **Jayaprakashan K. [2023 (3) KHC SN 14]** the Division Bench, on an analysis of the aforesaid provisions under the Kerala Land Reforms Act, found that the said Act is a complete code by itself as far as the right of cultivating tenant to fixity of tenure in respect of his holding, the right of the cultivating tenant to get assignment of the right, title and interest in respect of his holdings, the determination by the Land Tribunal the compensation and purchase price and the issuance of purchase 37 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 certificate to the cultivating tenant. The provisions under the said Act deal with the application for the purchase of the landlord's right by the cultivating tenant and the procedure for consideration of the application by the Land Tribunal, with notice to the landowner, the intermediaries, if any, the cultivating tenant and all persons interested in the land, calling upon them to prefer claims and objections, if any, and after making due enquiries. Thereafter, the Land Tribunal shall issue a certificate of purchase to the cultivating tenant. In view of the provisions under the Kerala Land Reforms (Tenancy) Rules, where the Land Tribunal is of the opinion that an application for purchase certificate has to be allowed, it shall, before it passes an order under Section 57, prepare preliminary findings on the matters enumerated in clauses (a) to (m) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 55. The Land Tribunal shall issue a notice of its findings to the landowner, every intermediary, etc., calling upon them to prefer in writings claims for the purchase price or part thereof. On receipt of the objections or claims, if any, the Land Tribunal shall consider the same and decide the claims after giving reasonable opportunity to the parties to produce such evidence as may be necessary and then proceed to pass an order under Section 57 of the Act. In such an order passed by the Land 38 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 Tribunal on an application filed under Section 54 of the Act by the cultivating tenant for purchase of landlord's right, the Land Tribunal has to record its finding that the applicant is a cultivating tenant, as defined under clause (8) of Section 2 of the Act, who is entitled to fixity of tenure under Section 13 of the Act, in respect of his holding. The tenancy is not in respect of land falling under clauses (i) to (xii) of Section 3 of the Act, which deals with exemptions. The tenancy is not one created in contravention of the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 74 of the Act, i.e., it is not a tenancy created after the commencement of the Act. It is well settled that, when the statute requires to do certain thing in a certain way, the thing must be done in that way or not at all. Other methods or modes of performance are impliedly and necessarily forbidden. The said proposition of law is based on a legal maxim _'expressio unius est exclusio alterius'_ meaning thereby that, if the statute provides for a thing to be done in a particular manner, then it has to be done in that manner and in no other manner, and following other course is not permissible. The said proposition of law about limitation of the exercise of statutory power has first been identified by Jassel M.R. in the case of **Taylor v. Taylor [(1876) 1 Ch.D. 426]** , wherein it was laid 39 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 down that, where a power is given to do a certain thing in a certain way, that thing must be done in that way, or not at all, and that other methods of performance are necessarily forbidden. The Privy Council applied the said principle in the case of **Nazir Ahmed v. King Emperor [AIR 1936 PC 253]** . In **Breen v. Amalgamated Engineering Union (1971 (1) All ER 1148)** Lord Denning, M.R. observed that the giving of reasons is one of the fundamentals of good administration. In **Alexander Machinery (Dudley) Ltd. v. Crabtree (1974 ICR 120)** it was observed that failure to give reasons amounts to denial of justice. Reasons are live links between the mind of the decision-taker to the controversy in question and the decision or conclusion arrived at. By the order dated 15.12.2021 in W.P.(C)No.8851 of 2020, this Court restrained all Land Tribunals in the State from proceedings with any Original Application filed before the appointed date or S.M.Proceedings for purchase certificate in respect of Devaswom lands of Temples under the control/ management of Malabar Devaswom Board, Travancore Devaswom Board and also the Cochin Devaswom Board, without the respective Devaswom Board, represented by its Secretary, in the party array. In the said order, it was made clear that a copy of the 40 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 Original Application or the report and other materials based on which S.M.Proceedings are initiated shall be enclosed along with the notice issued to the concerned Devaswom Board, through the concerned Village Officer. The Land Tribunals were directed to afford a reasonable opportunity to the concerned Devaswom Board to raise its contentions, both legal and factual. It was made clear that the decision taken by the Land Tribunals shall be one reflecting the legal and factual contentions raised by both sides. 23. In **Jayaprakashan K. [2023 (3) KHC SN 14]** , in continuation of the order dated 15.12.2021 in W.P.(C)No.8851 of 2020, it was ordered that, in the orders passed by the Land Tribunals in the State in Original Applications/S.M.Proceedings for purchase certificate, the Land Tribunal has to record its findings that the applicant is a cultivating tenant, as defined under clause (8) of Section 2 of the Act, who is entitled to fixity of tenure under Section 13 of the Act, in respect of his holding; that the tenancy is not in respect of land falling under clauses (i) to (xii) of Section 3 of the Act, which deals with exemptions; and that the tenancy is not one created in contravention of the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 74 of the Act, i.e., it is not a tenancy created after the commencement of the Act. In respect of temples which are 41 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 controlled institutions under Malabar Devaswom Board, the Land Tribunals shall take note of the provisions under Section 29 of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951, as per which any exchange, sale or mortgage and any lease of any immovable property belonging to, or given or endowed for the purpose of, any religious institution shall be null and void unless it is sanctioned by the Commissioner as being necessary or beneficial to the institution. 24. As already noticed hereinbefore, the dispute raised in these matters centers around the property of Thiruvaloor Sree Mahadeva Temple, comprised in Sy.Nos.437/6 and 437/10 of Alangad Village. There is a road in front of that temple. The issue involved in these writ petitions and the DBP can be resolved, if the boundaries of the Devaswom land is fixed by the Special Tahsildar (Land Conservancy), Travancore Devaswom Board, who is the additional 7[th] respondent in W.P.(C)No.12246 of 2016 and the additional 6[th] respondent in W.P.(C)No.12265 of 2023, with notice to the affected parties, the office bearers of the Temple Advisory Committee, Alangad Brahmana Samooham and also Alangad Grama Panchayat, taking note of the statutory provisions referred to hereinbefore and also the law laid down in the decisions referred 42 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 to supra. 25. In such circumstances, these writ petitions and DBP are disposed of by directing the Special Tahsildar (Land Conservancy), Travancore Devaswom Board to fix the boundaries of the Devaswom land of Thiruvaloor Sree Mahadeva Temple, covered by Ext.P1 settlement register in W.P.(C)No.12265 of 2023 comprised in Sy.Nos.437/10 and 437/6 of Alangad Village, taking note of the statutory provisions referred to hereinbefore and the law laid down in the decisions referred to supra, with notice to the affected parties, the office bearers of the Temple Advisory Committee, Alangad Brahmana Samooham and also Alangad Grama Panchayat, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment/order. The construction made by the Alangad Brahmana Samooham as seen in Ext.P4 photographs in W.P.(C)No.12265 of 2023 will be subject to the outcome of that survey. The order dated 30.09.2023 in W.P.(C)No.12265 of 2023, whereby Alangad Grama Panchayat is restrained from conducting any activities in the Devaswom land of Thiruvaloor Sree Mahadeva Temple, having an extent of 4.51 Acres in old Survey No.437/10 of Alangad Village covered by Ext.P1 settlement register, is made 43 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 absolute and the Grama Panchayat is restrained from conducting any activities in future in that Devaswom land. The Station House Officer, Aluva West Police Station shall ensure strict compliance of this direction. The Tahsildar, North Paravur and the Taluk Surveyor, North Paravur, who are impleaded as additional respondents in W.P.(C) Nos.12442 of 2016 and 12265 of 2023, shall render necessary assistance to the Special Tahsildar (Land Conservancy), Travancore Devaswom Board. The Travancore Devaswom Board shall file an action taken report before the learned Ombudsman. It would be open to the learned Ombudsman to file a fresh report before this Court, in case further orders are necessary. Sd/- ## **ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE** Sd/- **G. GIRISH, JUDGE** MIN 44 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12442/2016`** ## **`RESPONDENT EXHIBITS`** ``` EXHIBIT-R5(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ENLARGED LITHO MAP SHOWING THE TEMPLE AND THE TEMPLE ROAD. ``` ``` EXHIBIT-R5(B) TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT REGISTER OF SY.NO.437/6. ``` ``` EXHIBIT-R5(C) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER BEARING NO.D1-901/2000 DATED 19/03/2013 OF THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR, PARAVUR TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. ``` ``` EXHIBIT-R5(D) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 28/04/2009 OF THE 'THANTHRI' OF THE TEMPLE. EXHIBIT-R5(E) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 07.10.2008 OF THE 'URALAN' OF THE TEMPLE. PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 24.08.2015 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE VILLAGE OFFICER ALANGAD. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF BASIC TAX REGISTER RELATING TO SY.NO.437/6 OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE VILLAGE OFFICER ALANGAD. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P3 THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE ROAD REGISTER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH SHOWING THE LIE AND LOCATION OF THE MEPPALLAM COLONY ROAD OBTAINED FROM THE VILLAGE OFFICE ALANGAD. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 22.09.2015 TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER DATED 21.10.2015 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 17.03.2016 TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8 ACKNOWLEDGMENT EVIDENCING RECEIPT OF EXT.P7. ``` 45 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 ``` EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 01.06.2018 ISSUED BY THE RTI, OFFICER, ALANGAD PANCHAYATH EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 03.05.2018 FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER RTI, ACT EXHIBIT P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILED ESTIMATE NO. TS/22845/2017 - 18 EXHIBIT P12 A TRUE COPY OF SETTLEMENT REGISTER OF ALANGAD VILLAGE OFFICE OBTAINED UNDER PROVISION OF RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT ATTESTED AND ISSUED BY VILLAGE OFFICER, ALANGAD DATED 27.10.2018 EXHIBIT P13 A TRUE COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY VILLAGE OFFICER ALANGAD TO THE PETITIONER DATED 18.09.2015 EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF LITHO MAP PERTAINING SY.NOS.437/5,6 & 10 OF ALANGAD VILLAGE ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL SURVEY OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 06.12.2018 EXHIBIT 15 TRUE COPY OF SETTLEMENT REGISTER PERTAINING TO SY.NO.437/6 & 10 ISSUED BY CENTRAL SURVEY OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 06.12.2018 RESPONDENT EXHIBIT ``` ``` EXHIBIT R2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE LAND SPECIAL OFFICER DATED 15.09.2010 EXHIBIT R2(B) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF ADDITIONAL THAHASILDAR PARAVOOR DATED 19.03.2013 EXHIBIT R2(C) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN DBP No.131 OF 2015 DATED 26.03.2018 OF THIS HON’BLE COURT ``` 46 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 ``` APPENDIX OF DBP 4/2019 ANNEXURE R5(A) TRUE COPY OF THE SITE PLAN OF THE PROPOSED DRAINAGE PREPARED BY THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, LSGD SECTION, ALANGAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT ANNEXURE R5(B) TRUE COPY OF THE ESTIMATE REPORT OF THE PROPOSED DRAINAGE PREPARED BY THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, LSGD SECTION, ALANGAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT ANNEXURE R5(A) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE ASSET REGISTER SHOWING THIRUVALOOR – KUNDELI ROAD ANNEUXRE R5(B) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE ASSET REGISTER SHOWING MEPPALLAM COLONY ROAD EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF APPROVAL OF 2[ND] RESPONDENT BEARING NO.ROC 2785/012/L DATED 28.04.1992 TO THE 1[ST] RESPONDENT AS WELL AS THE 5[TH] RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 ASSET REGISTER OF THE PARAVUR SUB GROUP OF TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LITHO SKETCH SHOWING THE DIFFERENCE IN SURVEY NO. 437/6 AND 437/10 TAHSILDAR (LAND RECORDS), NORTH PARAVUR EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT REGISTER OF ALANGAD PAKUTHY EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR DATED 27.10.1987 BEARING ROC 573/87/SUIT OF THE 2[ND] RESPONDENT TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD. ``` 47 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5582/2021`** |**`PETITIONER EXHIBITS`**|| |---|---| |**`EXHIBIT P1`**|**`COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT REGISTERED [WITH`**| ||**`LEGITABLE COPY] DATED NIL`**| |**`EXHIBIT P2`**|**`COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 10.02.2021`**| |**`EXHIBIT P3`**|**`COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE OMBUDSMAN DATED`**| ||**`12.02.2021`**| |**`EXHIBIT P4`**|**`COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED`**| ||**`22.02.2021`**| |**`EXHIBIT P5`**|**`COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 17.02.2021`**| |**`EXHIBIT P6`**|**`COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 17.02.2021`**| |**`EXHIBIT P7`**|**`COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED`**| ||**`25.02.2021`**| |**`EXHIBIT P8`**|**`COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED`**| ||**`22.02.2021`**| |**`EXHIBIT P9`**|**`COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 22.02.2021`**| |**`EXHIBIT P10`**|**`COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 22.02.2021`**| |**`RESPONDENT EXHIBITS`**|| |**`EXHIBIT R4 (A)`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 1ST`**| ||**`PETITIONER HEREIN IN D.B.P.NO.4/2019 WITH`**| ||**`EXHIBITS BEFORE THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED`**| ||**`04.03.2020`**| |**`EXHIBIT R4 (B)`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN D.B.P NO.4/2019 PASSED`**| ||**`BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 12.03.2019.`**| |**`EXHIBIT R4 (C)`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE`**| ||**`4TH RESPONDENT HEREIN BEFORE THIS HONOURABLE`**| ||**`COURT IN D.B.P.NO.4/2019 DATED 26.03.2019`**| |**`EXHIBIT R4 (D)`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE SELECTION NOTICE ISSUED BY THE`**| ||**`ASSISTANT ENGINEER, LSGD SECTION DATED`**| ||**`26.05.2020.`**| 48 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 |**`EXHIBIT R4 (E)`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BETWEEN THE`**| |---|---| ||**`4TH RESPONDENT AND THE CONTRACTOR DATED`**| ||**`11.06.2020.`**| |**`EXHIBIT R4 (F)`**|**`TRUE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE CONSTRUCTION OF`**| ||**`DRAINAGE CARRIED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.`**| |**`EXHIBIT R4 (G)`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE ASSET`**| ||**`REGISTER SHOWING THIRUVALOOR-KUNDELI ROAD`**| |**`EXHIBIT R4 (H)`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE ASSET`**| ||**`REGISTER SHOWING MEPPALLAM COLONY ROAD.`**| |**`RESPONDENT EXHIBITS`**|| |**`EXHIBIT R5(A)`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE WP(C)12442/2016 DATED`**| ||**`28.03.2016 (WITHOUT EXHIBITS)`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(B)`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT SUBMITTED`**| ||**`BY THE PANCHAYATH TO EXT.R5(A) DATED 20.06.2016`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(C)`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT BEFORE THE`**| ||**`OMBUDSMAN AND NUMBERED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT AS`**| ||**`TDB REPORT NO.04/2019 (DBP 04/2019) IN COMPLAINT`**| ||**`NO.143/2017 DATED 17.01.2019.`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(D)`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT SUBMITTED`**| ||**`BY THE PANCHAYATH TO EXT.R5 (C), DATED`**| ||**`11.03.2019.`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(E)`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX REGISTER RELATING`**| ||**`TO SY.NO.437/6 DATED NIL ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE`**| ||**`OFFICE, ALANGAD.`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(F)`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE (PAGE NO.62) OF`**| ||**`THE ROAD REGISTER OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT`**| ||**`PANCHAYATH, DATED NIL.`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(G)`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH ISSUED BY THE ALANGAD`**| ||**`VILLAGE OFFICE SHOWING THE LIE AND LOCATION OF`**| ||**`MEPPALAM COLONY ROAD, IN YELLOW COLOUR SHADE.`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(H)`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER RTI ACT`**| ||**`DATED 22.09.2015`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(I)`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY TO EXT.R5(H) OF 4TH`**| ||**`RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH DATED 21.10.2015`**| 49 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 ``` EXHIBIT R5(J) A TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT REGISTER OF ALANGAD VILLAGE OBTAINED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF RTI ACT DATED 27.10.2018 EXHIBIT R5(K) TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT REGISTER PERTAINING TO SY.NOS.437/6,437/10 OF ALANGAD VILLAGE, ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL SURVEY OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, DATED 06.12.2018. EXHIBIT R5 (L) A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION BEFORE THE ALANGAD PANCHAYATH, DATED 17.03.2016. EXHIBIT R5(M) A TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO EXT.R5(L) DATED 17.03.2016 EXHIBIT R5(N) A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT DATED 03.05.2018 EXHIBIT R5(O) A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY TO EXT R5(M) DATED 01.06.2018 EXHIBIT R5(P) COPY OF THE DETAILED ESTIMATE FOR RE-TARRING OF MEPPALAM ROAD BEARING DETAILED ESTIMATE NO.T S/22845/2017-18 DATED NIL EXHIBIT R5(Q) A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE GOVERNMENT PLEADER IN WP(C)12442/16 DATED 16.06.2020 BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXHIBIT R5(R) A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED BY THE PANCHAYATH IN DBP 04/2019 DATED 10.01.2020 EXHIBIT R5(S) A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN DBP 131/2015 BY THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 26.03.2018 EXHIBIT R5(T) TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 15.01.2019 OF VILLAGE OFFICER, ALANGAD. EXHIBIT R5(U) PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWS THE DISPUTED ROAD, SPACE PROVIDED FOR THE TEMPLE FOR PALLIVETTA ETC. ``` 50 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12265/2023`** ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT-P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT REGISTER SHOWING THE DEVASWOM PROPERTIES. EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT DATED 17/02/2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 03/03/2021 IN W.P.(C)NO.5582/2021. EXHIBIT-P4 PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE ENCROACHMENT MADE BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT INTO THE DEVASWOM PROPERTY AS WELL AS ALTERNATE ACCESS. EXHIBIT-P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 11/02/2023 ALONG WITH THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT. RESPONDENT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R4(A) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE ASSET REGISTER SHOWING KUNDELI ROAD MAINTAINED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT R4(B) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE ASSET REGISTER SHOWING MEPPALLAM COLONY ROAD MAINTAINED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT R4(C) TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT SUBMITTED BY K.H.STHANUNATHAN BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 17.01.2020 EXHIBIT R4(D) TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PLAN SUBMITTED BY K.H.STHANUNATHAN BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT R4(E) TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT NO.A4/2455/2020 DATED 03.07.2020 GRANTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT PANCHAYAT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT R3(A) TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 24.4.2023 EXHIBIT R3(B) A PHOTOGRAPH OF GATE FORMING THE ACCESS FROM THE ROAD ``` 51 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 |**`EXHIBIT R3(C)`**|**`TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PURAMPOKKU PROPERTY`**| |---|---| ||**`REGISTER ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER ALLANGAD`**| |**`EXHIBIT R3(D)`**|**`TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF EXTRACT OF BASIC TAX REGISTER`**| ||**`ISSUED BY THE ALLANGAD VILLAGE`**| |**`EXHIBIT R3(E)`**|**`THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE TRENCH THAT HAS BEEN`**| ||**`DUG BY THE THIRUVALLOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT IN FRONT`**| ||**`OF THE SHOPPING COMPLEX OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT`**| ||**`AND THE TEMPORARY IRON COVERING PLACED OVER THE`**| ||**`OPEN TRENCH`**| |**`EXHIBIT R3(F)`**|**`THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE TRENCH THAT HAS BEEN`**| ||**`DUG BY THE THIRUVALLOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT IN FRONT`**| ||**`OF THE SHOPPING COMPLEX OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT`**| ||**`AND THE TEMPORARY IRON COVERING PLACED OVER THE`**| ||**`OPEN TRENCH`**| |**`EXHIBIT R3(G)`**|**`THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE LAY OF THE PANCHAYAT`**| ||**`ROAD LEADING FROM THE TEMPLE AND ITS ROAD MARGIN`**| |**`EXHIBIT R4(F)`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER G.O.(P)`**| ||**`NO.1825/2023/LSGD DATED 15.09.2023 ISSUED BY THE`**| ||**`1ST RESPONDENT`**| |**`EXHIBIT R4(G)`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE`**| ||**`SUB-GROUP OFFICER, THIRUVALOOR DEVASWOM DATED`**| ||**`28.09.2023`**| |**`EXHIBIT R4(H)`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE PROGRAMME NOTICE OF`**| ||**`KERALOTSAVAM 2023`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(A)`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE WP (C) 12442/2016 DATED`**| ||**`28.03.2016 (WITHOUT EXHIBITS) BEFORE THE HONBLE`**| ||**`HIGH COURT OF KERALA.`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(B)`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER DATED 20.06.2016`**| ||**`SUBMITTED BY THE PANCHAYATH TO EXT.R5(A)`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(C)`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT MADE BY THE`**| ||**`PETITIONER HEREIN BEFORE THE OMBUDSMAN AND`**| ||**`NUMBERED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT AS DBP 04/2019`**| ||**`DATED 17.01.2019.`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(D)`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER DATED 11.03.2019`**| ||**`SUBMITTED BY THE PANCHAYATH TO EXT.R5 (C)`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(E)`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WP(C)`**| ||**`5582/2021 DATED 03.03.2021 BEFORE THE HONBLE`**| ||**`HIGH COURT OF KERALA`**| 52 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 ``` EXHIBIT R5(F) TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER DATED 12.03.2021( WITHOUT EXHIBITS) SUBMITTED BY THE PANCHAYATH TO EXT.R5 (E) . EXHIBIT R5(G) THE BASIC TAX REGISTER RELATING TO SY.NO.437/6 OBTAINED BY ME FROM THE VILLAGE OFFICE ALANGAD ``` ``` EXHIBIT R5(H) A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE ROAD REGISTER OF THE ALANGAD PANCHAYATH. EXHIBIT R5(I) A TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH ISSUED BY THE ALANGAD VILLAGE OFFICE SHOWING THE LIE AND LOCATION OF MEPPALAM COLONY ROAD. EXHIBIT R5(J) A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 22.09.2015 TO THE GRAMA PANCHAYAT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT EXHIBIT R5(K) A TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION VIDE REPLY LETTER DATED 21.10.2015, FURNISHED BY PANCHAYATH UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT EXHIBIT R5(L) A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE RESIDENTS OF THE LOCALITY DATED 24.08.2015 UNDER RIGHT INFORMATION ACT EXHIBIT R5(M) A TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION DATED 21.10.2015 FURNISHED BY THE SECRETARY, ALANGAD GRAMAPANCHAYATH UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT. EXHIBIT R5(N) A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 17.03.2016 TO THE PANCHAYATH. EXHIBIT R5(O) TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT EVIDENCING REPORT OF EXT.R5 (N) BY THE PANCHAYATH. EXHIBIT R5(P) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 01.06.2018 ISSUED BY THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION OFFICER, ALANGAD PANCHAYATH. EXHIBIT R5(Q) COPY OF THE DETAILED ESTIMATE FOR RETARRING OF MELPALAM ROAD BEARING DETAILED ESTIMATE NO. TS/22845/2017-18. EXHIBIT R5(R) A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE GOVERNMENT PLEADER IN WP (C) 12442/16 DATED 16.06.2020 BEFORE THIS HONBLE COURT. ``` 53 W.P.(C)Nos.12442 of 2016, 5582 of 2021 and 12265 of 2023 & DBP No.4 of 2019 |**`EXHIBIT R5(S)`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED BY THE`**| |---|---| ||**`PANCHAYATH IN DBP 04/2019 DATED 10.01.2020`**| ||**`(WITHOUT ANNEXURES).`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(T)`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN DBP 131 /2015`**| ||**`DATED 26.03.2018 OF THIS HONBLE COURT .`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(U)`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 15.01.2019 ISSUED BY`**| ||**`THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ALANGAD.`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(V)`**|**`A TRUCE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT REGISTER ISSUED`**| ||**`FROM THE VILLAGE OFFICER ALANGAD`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(W)`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC 6384 OF 2015`**| ||**`DATED 10/04/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE HIGH`**| ||**`COURT OF KERALA.`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(X)`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN WRIT APPEAL NO`**| ||**`1537 OF 2015 OF THIS HONBLE COURT.`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(Y)`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN RP 283 OF 2017`**| ||**`DATED 23/3/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE HIGH`**| ||**`COURT OF KERALA.`**| |**`EXHIBIT R5(Z)`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE CURRENT`**| ||**`DILAPIDATED CONDITION OF THE MEPPALAM ROAD`**|