(1.) The prayers in this Original Petition (Civil) filed under the enabling provisions contained in Article 227 of the Constitution of India are as follows:
(2.) Heard Sri.Rajesh P.Nair, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/plaintiff, Sri.N.Nandakumara Menon, learned Standing Counsel instructed by Sri.P.K.Manojkumar, learned Standing Counsel for the Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation appearing for the 1st respondent, and Sri.M.I.Johnson, learned Senior Govt. Pleader appearing for R-2 and R-3.
(3.) The petitioners herein are the plaintiffs in O.S.No. 137/2018 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Thiruvananthapuram and the respondents herein are defendants 4, 5 and 6 respectively, in the said suit. The suit is one for declaration and mandatory injunction, recovery of possession, permanent prohibitory injunction and other consequential reliefs. The 1st plaintiff is Kanjiravilakom Devi Temple (Deity), represented by its "Karanavar", one Sri.C.Gopinathan and the 2nd plaintiff is the Karanavar himself, the above mentioned Sri.C.Gopinathah. The petitioners would state that the said suit was necessitated following the attempts made by respondents 2 and 3 herein to make illegal constructions in the plaint schedule properties, that too, without obtaining necessary permit and submission of plain to the 1st respondent Corporation. That along with the said suit Ext.P-2 I.A.No.708/2017 in the said O.S. was filed for temporary injunction, to which urgent notices were issued to the respondents and that the case stood posted to 27.1.2018. In the meanwhile, as per an application of the plaintiffs, an Advocate Commissioner was appointed and as per the direction of the court below, Ext.P-3 commission report was also filed on 27.1.2018. That on 27.1.2018, as there was no sitting of the court, the matter stood adjourned to 5.4.2018. That considering the urgency of the matter, Ext.P-4 I.A.No.1351/2018 dated 14.2.2018 was filed for advancing the case. Resultantly Ext.P-5 impugned order dated 15.2.20218 was passed by the court, whereby the said court has dismissed the prayer in Ext.P-4 I.A.1351/2018 in the abovesaid O.S. only on the mere ground that it is practically possible to allow the prayer in Ext.P-4 petition, as the said court holds additional charge of several courts. It is averred that, in Ext.P-3 commission report it is clearly stated that the respondents are making construction without obtaining necessary permit from the authorities concerned. It is in the light of these aspects that the petitioners have filed instant Original Petition (Civil) with the abovesaid prayers.