PALLIKKARA MUSLIM JAMA-ATH Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners seek police protection to administer a Juma Mazjid and the Wakf properties attached to it. The first petitioner is the Juma Mazjid and the second petitioner is stated to be its Kaikkaran.

(2.) The Juma Mazjid and the Wakf properties referred to in the writ petition, hereinafter called collectively as Mazjid are to be managed in terms of Ext.P1 decree passed by the District Court, Paravoor in a representative suit. As per Ext.P1, the Mazjid has to be managed by a representative of the families of defendants 1 to 5 in the suit and an elected representative of the members of the Mahal. The case of the petitioners is that the second petitioner is the duly elected representative of the families of defendants 1 to 5 in the suit and he is not permitted by respondents 3 to 6 to manage the affairs of the Mazjid. The petitioners, therefore, seek police protection for administering the Mahal.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed by respondents 3 to 6. The stand taken by the said respondents is that the third respondent is the duly elected representative of the members of the Mahal and the dispute arose between the parties as the second petitioner is not prepared to accept the third respondent as the duly elected representative of the members of the Mahal.