KSHETRA UPADESHAKA SAMITHI KUNNATHUSERRY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Temple Advisory Committee and two devotees of Kootholikavu Sree Bhagavathy Temple, also known as Kuthullisserry Bhagavathy Devaswom, have filed this Writ Petition invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking decree of certiorari quashing Ext.P6, P7 and P8. The petitioners seek a further relief of a writ of mandamus directing the 9th respondent-Special Tahsildar, Kerala Land Conservancy Unit of the Travancore Devaswom Board to take steps under the Land Conservancy Act, 1957 for removing encroachments from the properties of the Temple, which are described in Ext.P6. In the alternative, a direction to respondent Nos.5 and 6 to institute civil suits for the recovery of the said properties is sought.

(2.) There were litigations initiated by the Temple Advisory Committee. As a sequel to such litigations, the 9th respondent was approached for the removal of encroachments upon the properties of the Temple. The 9th respondent took the stand that the properties in question do not come within the purview of Sec. 3 of the Land Conservancy Act and, therefore, no action for summary eviction under Sec. 11 of the Act could be initiated. Ext.P6 is the order of the 9th respondent. An appeal was preferred before the Sub Collector, Fort Kochi, but the same was dismissed as per Ext.P7 order dtd. 19/8/2019. The matter was taken up before the District Collector. The District Collector also took the same view and dismissed the revision. Challenging the said orders, the Temple Advisory Committee approached the Commissioner of Land Revenue. The Commissioner refused to intervene stating that the District Collector in exercise of the revisional jurisdiction under Sec. 16(2) of the Land Conservancy Act had taken the decision and therefore no further revision could be entertained.

(3.) When this matter came up for consideration on 6/8/2021, the learned Standing Counsel for the Travancore Devaswom Board and the learned Senior Government pleader sought time to file counter affidavits.