Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943 PETITIONER: A.M. SAYED, AGED 69 YEARS S/O. ABDUL KAREEM, RESIDING AT SAFIYA MANZIL, THAIPPARAMBIL, LAJANATH WARD, ALAPPUZHA - 688001. BY ADV SHAMEENA SALAHUDHEEN RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001. 2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR. CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM - 691013. 3 THE REVENUE DIVISION OFFICER, VIDYA NAGAR, KOLLAM - 691013. 4 CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EAST POLICE STATION, KOLLAM - 691001. 5 SECRETARY, CHINNAKKADA MUSLIM JAMA-ATH, CHINNAKKADA P.O, KOLLAM. 6 MUHAMMED ANHAR, AGED 50 YEARS S/O. MUHAMMED KUNJU, HAMSA COTTAGE, NADUVILAKKARA, UMAYANALLOOR, KOLLAM - 691589. 7 M. ANSARI, AGED 50 YEARS S/O. MOITHEEN SHA, ALINAS HOUSE, CANTONMENT SOUTH, CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM - 691001. 8 SAIFUDEEN, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.H.M.HANEEFA, H HOUSE, 37 A, SASTHA NAGAR, KOLLAM - 691004. 9 JALALUDHEEN, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O. ABDUL RAZAK, NIZAM MANZIL, CHANTHANATHOPPE, KOLLAM - 691014.
10 NIZAMUDHEEN, AGED 57 YEARS S/O. MUHAMMED KUNJU, KOTTAYATTU VEEDU, KAVADIPURAM NAGAR, ASRAMAM, KOLLAM - 691002. ADDL. 11 KERALA STATE WAQF BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KALOOR, COCHIN - 682 017. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.) SRI.T.R.RAJAN SRI.JAMSHEED HAFIZ, SC, WAQF BOARD SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE SRI.P.PRIJITH SRI.THOMAS P.KURUVILLA SRI.R.GITHESH SRI.HARIKRISHNAN S. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who is stated to be the tenant of a shop
room owned by the fifth respondent - Jama-ath, has approached this Court alleging that the fourth respondent - Circle Inspector of Police is harassing him under their influence and that of respondents 6 to 10, who are the members of the said Jama - ath. The petitioner says that the intervention made by the fourth respondent is illegal and that this is manifest from the fact that in Ext.P7, he has issued a notice to him purportedly under Sections 145 and 147 of the Cr.P.C, notifying him that a requisition has been made to the jurisdictional Revenue Divisional Officer. The petitioner says that as long as that he is the tenant of the building, he can be evicted only through the process of law, particularly because the Wakf Board has also now impleaded themselves in the party array as an additional respondent.
2. Smt.K.Amminikutty, learned Senior Government
Pleader, answered to the afore submissions made on behalf of the petitioner by Smt.Shameena Salahudheen, saying that the fourth respondent has only acted in compliance with the statutory duties vested in him and that Ext.P7 was issued because, on account of the internecine disputes between the parties, there were several instance of breach of peace. She pointed out that, as this Court has already clarified in the interim order dated 12.10.2021, the parties are bound by the said notice and that the petitioner has been directed to maintain peace without any breach. She submitted that this is all that the fourth respondent has done and therefore, prayed that this writ petition be dismissed.
3. Sri.T.R.Rajan, learned counsel appearing for
respondents 5 to 10, affirmed that the property belongs to Jama - ath and that the petitioner is now in illegal occupation of the same. He added that the Executive Officer of the Jama - ath has already now initiated action for his eviction and therefore, prayed that this writ petition be dismissed.
4. Sri.Jamsheed Hafiz, learned standing counsel for the
11th respondent - Wakf Board, also submitted that since the building belongs to the Jama - ath, necessary action under the Wakf Act has been or will be initiated by his client. He prayed that such liberty may be reserved to them.
5. When I evaluate the afore submissions, there can be
little doubt that even as per the respondents, the petitioner is in possession of the building in question, but they assert that the lease agreement is void and that it is a concoctant document. However, it is indubitable that I cannot enter into an affirmative consideration of these aspects, since it will entail evaluation of necessary factual circumstances and documents, which this Court is proscribed from doing, while acting under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
6. Be that as it may, as far as this Court is concerned, it is to only enjoined to ensure that peace is maintained and that the lives of the parties are sufficiently protected.
7. In the afore perspective, I order this writ petition
confirming the interim order dated 12.10.2021; thus directing the fourth respondent to ensure that peace is maintained in the area in question without any contravention of law being made by either the petitioner or the party respondents in future.
8. As far as the party respondents and the Kerala Wakf Board are concerned, they are at full liberty to initiate any action that they may choose against the petitioner; for which purpose, all the contentions are left open, including as to the genuineness of the Lease Deed in question. At this time, Smt.Shameena Salahudheen, learned counsel for the petitioner, intervened to say that her client
has already obtained Ext.P6 order against the party respondents; and therefore, that it may be clarified that when any action is sought to be taken by the Wakf Board, the same also be directed to be adverted to. I do not deem it necessary to offer a clarification as now sought for since, as I have already said above, the parties will have to act as per law and not in contravention of it.
Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE stu APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21977/2021 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RENT DEED EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 10.06.2021. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF THE ADVANCE PAID BY THE PETITIONER TO THE CHINNAKADA MUSLIM JAMA-ATH. Exhibit P2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE DONATION MADE BY THE PETITIONER TOWARDS THE CHINNAKADA MUSLIM JAMA-ATH. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED ...7.2021. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 9.8.2021. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN O.S NO. 427/2021.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM INJUNCTION ORDER
IN IA 1/2021 IN O.S. 427/2021. DATED 11.8.2021. Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE AFFIXED BY THE POLICE UNDER SECTION 149 CR.P.C Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.