Judgment:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE3D DAY OF APRIL201413TH CHAITHRA, 1936 WA.No. 369 of 2014 () IN WP(C).34478/2007 ------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT
DATED0701.2014 IN WP(C) 34478/2007 of THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE APPELLANT(S)/3RD RESPONDENT: ----------------------------- DEEPA T.K., AGED43YEARS W/O.RAMESAN, PUTHIYAPURAYIL HOUSE, KADACHIRA P.O. ADOOR, KANNUR-670621. BY ADV. SRI.B.PRAMOD RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER/RESPONDENTS1& 2: -------------------------------------------- 1. VIYYATHUL ISLAM DARS MADRASSA AND MUSLIM JAMA-ATH MOSQUE COMMITTEE, ADOOR, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, R.V.SHAHUL HAMEED S/O.ERANULLAN KUTTY, TRADER, SHAS BAVTH ADOOR.
2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR-670001.
3. THE SECRETARY, KADAMBOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KANNUR-670001. R1 BY ADV. SRI.N.DHARMADAN (SR.) R1 BY ADV. SMT.D.P.RENU R2 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SYAMKUMAR C.R R3 BY SRI.K.V.SOHAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON0304-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, JJ.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W.A.No.369 of 2014 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2014 JUDGMENT
K.M.JOSEPH, J.
Appellant is the 3rd respondent in the writ petition. The writ petition was filed seeking the following prayers: "i) to call for the records from the District Collector in proceedings No.D26042/2004/D- Dis. and quash Ext.P1 order dated 17.10.2007 prohibiting the use of burial ground belonged to the "Mosque Committee" passed by the District Collector and withdraw the interim order dated 25.11.2006 for maintaining status quo indefinitely; ii) to stay the operation of the impugned order till the disposed of writ petition; Addl.Prayer(iv): to declare that the 'Chekuthankadi Paramba' comprised in Re-sy.No.71/1 and 71/2 of Kadamboor Village as burial ground is being used by the petitioner and local people as burial ground attached the Mosque belonging to the Viyyathul Islam Dars Madrassa and Muslim Jama-ath Mosque Committee from 1940 and hence exempted from the provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Burning and Burial grounds) Act and Rules framed thereunder." 2. By Ext.P1 order, the District Collector has found merit in the case of the writ petitioner. The relevant portion of Ext.P1 order is as follows: W.A.No.369 of 2014 2 "1) The land in question was not used as a burial ground prior to 1967 or registered as a burial ground under the Kerala Panchayath Raj (Burning and Burial Ground) Rules 1967. Thus the question of taking a decision by the District Collector under section 4(2) of the Kerala Panchayath Raj (Burning and Burial Ground) Rules 1998 does not arise. Hence the claim of the Mosqe Committee is baseless and rejected accordingly. 2) If the committee proposes to use the land in question as a burial ground they are at liberty to apply afresh for a licensee to bury the dead bodies, by observing all formalities stipulated in the Kerala Panchayath Raj (Burning and Burial Grounds) Rules 1998. 3.) If the Committee submitted such an application that will be considered on merit. Until then, the status quo existing after 25.01.2006 should continue, i.e., no dead bodies shall be buried in the land in question" 3. The learned Single Judge accepted the case of the writ petitioner for a re-look for the purposes of reconsidering the matter in the light of Exts.P3 to P13.
4. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the appellant/the third respondent is before this Court. W.A.No.369 of 2014 3 5. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned Senior counsel for the writ petitioner, the learned counsel for the Panchayath and the learned Government Pleader.
6. The learned counsel for the appellant would point out that the learned Single Judge has exceeded the limits of judicial review and no ground is made out for directing a re- consideration on the basis of Exts.P3 to P13. He further submits that Exts.P3 to P13 would not establish that the land in question was used as burial ground.
7. Per contra, the learned Senior counsel for the writ petitioner would submit that no interference is called for in the impugned order. The learned Single Judge remitted the case back to the District Collector to re-consider the issue in the light of the documents produced as Exts.P3 to P13. No doubt, the Panchayat and the appellant have been given liberty to adduce evidence. We notice further that the learned Single Judge has directed that the existing state of affairs will W.A.No.369 of 2014 4 continue. By existing state of affairs, we must understand that as directed by the District Collector no dead bodies are buried in the land in question. On the totality of the facts, we need not interfere with the exercise of jurisdiction by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. K.M.JOSEPH JUDGE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE mns/