LawSphereX

DEITY MAHAVISHNU INSTALLED IN ELOOKKARA PULLOORPILLY v. STATE OF KERALA,

Court: High Court of Kerala

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM

Judgment date:

Case summary

High Court of Kerala judgment dated 2025-02-24. DEITY MAHAVISHNU INSTALLED IN ELOOKKARA PULLOORPILLY v. STATE OF KERALA,. Read the judgment and case details...

Judgment text

2025:KER:15910 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM TH MONDAY, THE 24 DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 5TH PHALGUNA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 4779 OF 2022 PETITIONERS: 1 DEITY MAHAVISHNU INSTALLED IN ELOOKKARA PULLOORPILLY SREE MOOKAMBIKA DEVI TEMPLE, REPRESENTED BY V. G. MURUKESH, AGED 38, S/O. GOPALAKRISHNA MENON, PRESIDENT, ELOOKKARA, MUPPATHADAM P. O. , ALUVA-683110, RESIDING AT VALLOPPILLIL, KADUNGALLOOR VILLAGE, ELOOKKARA, MUPPATHADAM P. O. , ERNAKULAM-683110. 2 ELOOKKARA PULLOORPILLY SREE MOOKAMBIKA DEVASWOM TRUST, ELOOKKARA, MUPPATHADAM P. O. , ALUVA-683110, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT V. G. MURUKESH, AGED 38, S. O. GOPALAKRISHNA MENON, VALLOPPILLIL, KADUNGALLOOR VILLAGE, ELOOKKARA, MUPPATHADAM P. O. , ERNAKULAM-683110. 3 DIVAKARAN M. R. , AGED 60 YEARS S/O. RAVUNNI, SECRETARY, ELOOKKARA PULLOORPILLI SREE MOOKAMBIKA DEVASWOM TRUST, ELOOKKARA, MUPPATHADAM P. O.

, ALUVA-683110, RESIDING AT KALANGARA MANAKKAPPARAMB HOUSE, KADUNVALLOOR VILLAGE, ELOOKKARA, MUPPATHADAM P. O. , ERNAKULAM-683110. BY ADVS. T. C. GOVINDASWAMY KALA T. GOPI RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, STATE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2 THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, STATE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 3 THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, 2025:KER:15910 DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, STATE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 4 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, ERNAKULAM-692030. 5 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD ROADS DIVISION, ERNAKULAM-682021. 6 THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, NORTH PARAVOOR, ERNAKULAM-683513. 7 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LA), COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682030. 8 THE SECRETARY, KADUNGALOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MUPPATHADAOM, ERNAKULAM- 683110. 9 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KADUNGALLOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683110. BY ADV DINESH MATHEW J.

MURICKEN GP- NIMA JACOB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24. 02. 2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:15910 JUDGMENT th Dated this the 24 day of February, 2025 The petitioners have approached this Court challenging Ext. P15 and for a declaration that the part of the PWD road in Survey No. 214/9 of Kadungalloor Village is part and parcel of the ‘thanathu’ property st settled in favour of the 1 petitioner Deity’s temple as st per the settlement register and that thus the 1 petitioner is entitled to get compensation in so far as the said property has been taken over by the PWD. st 2. The 1 petitioner herein is a Deity consecrated and installed in Elookkara Pulloorpilly Sree Mookambika nd Devi Temple. The 2 petitioner is the Eloorkkara Pulloorpilly Sree Mookambika Devaswom Trust. It is averred that the said Eloorkkara Pulloorpilly Devaswom Temple with Lord Mahavishnu as the presiding Deity, has been in existence since 500 years.

The said temple is situated in Survey No. 214/9 of Kadungallor Village, 2025:KER:15910 Paravoor Taluk. The entire area of 1 acre 9 cents property, is in addition to 39 cents of land in Survey No. 214/8B, which also forms part and parcel of the sanctum sanctorum of the Temple. Ext. P1 settlement register would reveal that as per the erstwhile Travancore settlement, which took place more than 100 years ago, in the settlement register the above-mentioned properties in Survey No. 214/8B and survey No. 214/9 are shown to be properties of Pullorpilly Devaswom, and Ext. P1 would reveal that the said properties are ‘Thanathu’ and ‘Karamozhivu’. The petitioners submit that the right of ownership, as regards the ‘thanathu’ lands, was considered by this Court in Narayana pillai Madhavan Pillai vs. Kali Gomathi Amma [2015(1) KLJ 531], and held in para 11 as follows: “11. In the erstwhile Travancore settlement took place more than 100 years ago. Exts.

A1 and A2 are copies of the settlement registers. In these registers the plaint schedule properties are shown to be the properties of Mannadi Bhagavthy. It is further shown 2025:KER:15910 that it is ‘thanathu’ property. The name of Mangalath tarwad does not find a place in the settlement registers. In the Travancore State Manual published by the Government of Kerala, it is shown that ‘thanathu’ lands were originally government lands. ‘Thanathu’ lands were lands for which no pattas were issued at the last settlement and which were enjoyed by the tenants either on payment of the rent fixed at the settlement or on Kuthakapattam given by the department of government. (See Travancore State Manual, Vo. III Ch. XV, pages 192 and 193 published by the government of Kerala in 1996). In Malayalam ‘thanathu’ means ownership. (See Malayalam – English Dictionary published by NBS). Exts.

A1 and A2 indicate that the plaint schedule properties were originally government lands, which later came in the ownership of Mannadi Bhagavathy Temple. ” 3. It is the case of the petitioners that, notwithstanding the above legal position regarding the right and ownership of the petitioners over the property, during the year 2016, the Kerala Public Works Department constructed a road namely Kadungalloor- Kayantikkara-Elloorkkara-Alupuram Road through the Temple properties in Survey No. 214/9 without notice or payment of compensation. Thereupon, a petition was filed before the PWD authorities seeking compensation. Later on, Ext. P3 to P6 complaints were preferred. Then, th the 5 respondent issued Ext. P8, intimating the 2025:KER:15910 petitioners that the Trust has not produced any documents to prove that the property belonged to the Temple and thereupon directed them to produce valid documents from the revenue authorities.

In the light of the said direction, an application for measurement and issuance of a sketch of the Temple ‘Thanathu’ property in Survey No. 214/9 of Kadungalloor Village taken over th for PWD road was filed before the 6 respondent Tahsildar, as evident from Ext. P9. Due to inaction on the th part of the 6 respondent, Ext. P10 petition was filed th before the 4 respondent District Collector. Since no action was taken on Ext. P10, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing W. P. (C. ) NO. 17485/2021. After hearing both sides, this Court by Ext. P11 judgment directed the District Collector to consider and pass orders on Ext. P10 request submitted by the petitioners. In implementation of the said direction, Ext. P15 order 2025:KER:15910 was issued by the District Collector rejecting the claim of the petitioners. 4. The specific case of the petitioners is that, Ext.

P15 order was issued based on various reports submitted by the Tahsildar (LR) on the basis of an enquiry conducted by the Village Officer etc. , None of the records relied on by the District Collector to issue Ext. P15, were furnished to the petitioners. Petitioners submit that they have obtained these report as per the provisions of the Right to Information Act which is produced as Ext. P16. In the report, it is specifically stated that the road has been in existence since 1960 and at that point of time, it was the Panchayat Road. In 1980, it was converted to MLA road and in 2010, it was converted to a PWD road. A perusal of Ext. P16 report of the Village Officer, would reveal the entire finding that the said road was in existence in 1960 and later on, in 2010 was converted to PWD road etc, were all based only on a local enquiry 2025:KER:15910 conducted by the Village Officer.

If the road was a Panchayat Road as early as 1960, and later converted into an MLA road in 1980 and to a PWD Road in 2010, definitely records in this regard will be available with the Public Works Department and the Panchayath, which is not seen to have been perused or considered by the District Collector while issuing Ext. P15 order and the same has been issued only relying on the report submitted by the Tahsildar (LR), copy of which is produced as Ext. P16. Secondly, another stand taken by the District Collector is that no documents to substantiate the ownership of the property has been produced by the petitioners. Ext. P1 is the settlement register which clearly shows that the property is in the st name of the 1 petitioner Deity, and going by the judgment of Narayan Pillai Madhavan Pillai(supra), the mentioning of ‘Thanathu’ in the settlement register denotes ownership. 2025:KER:15910 5.

In view of the above and taking into consideration that the property is stated to be the property of , I am of the opinion that, the matter requires reconsideration at th the hands of the 4 respondent. Accordingly, Ext. P15 is th set aside with a consequential direction to the 4 respondent to reconsider Ext. P10 request submitted by th the petitioner afresh. The 4 respondent shall supply th copies of all documents relied on by the 4 respondent to take a decision as per Ext. P15 to the petitioners within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. To verify the exact position and age of the road in existence, the District Collector shall take into consideration the panchayat’s asset register, if any, available or the documents available with the Public Works Department since it is claimed that the property has been taken over and converted to a PWD road in 2010.

The petitioners shall be afforded an opportunity of being heard before taking a decision as directed 2025:KER:15910 above. A decision shall be taken within an outer limit of th two months thereafter. The 4 respondent shall take appropriate action in accordance with law, if the request in Ext. P10 is in favour of the petitioners. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE AP Continued at Page No. 11 2025:KER:15910 W. P. (C)NO. 4779/2022(V) The sentence "In view of the above and taking into consideration that the property is stated to be the property of, I am of the opinion that, the matter requires th reconsideration at the hands of the 4 respondent. " Appearing paragraph 5 of the judgment dated 24/02/2025 in W. P. (C) No.

4779/2022 is corrected as "In view of the above and taking into consideration that the st property is stated to be the property of the 1 petitioner Deity, I am of the opinion that, the matter requires th reconsideration at the hands of the 4 respondent. " As per the order dated 21/03/2025 in I. A. 01/25 in W. P. (C) No. 4779/2022. Sd/- JOINT REGISTRAR 2025:KER:15910 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4779/2022 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE SETTLEMENT REGISTER MAINTAINED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AS REGARDS THE SURVEY NO. 214/9 OF KADUNGALLOOR VILLAGE. A TRUE COPY OF PETITION DATED 24/08/2019 FILED BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT, EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD, ROAD DIVISION, ERNAKULAM. A TRUE COPY OF AN EMAIL PETITION DATED 08/10/2020 FILED BEFORE THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, KERALA. A TRUE COPY OF AN EMAIL PETITION DATED 25/10/2020 FILED BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM.

A TRUE COPY OF PETITION FILED ON 30/10/2020 BEFORE THE HON'BLE CHIEF MINISTER, KERALA THROUGH THE CM'S PORTAL WITH DOCKET NO. P201000716. A TRUE COPY OF PETITION FILED ON 12/01/2021 BEFORE THE HON'BLE CHIEF MINISTER, KERALA THROUGH THE CM'S PORTAL WITH DOCKET NO. P 210100284. A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 16/03/2021 FILED BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD, ROAD DIVISION, ERNAKULAM. A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER BEARING NO. E-1527/17- 209 DATED 23/*03/2021 COMMUNICATED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD, ROADS DIVISION, ERNAKULAM IN THE TRUST SECRETARY. A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 27/03/2021 FILED BEFORE THE 6TH RESPONDENT TAHSILDAR, NORTH PARAVOOR. A TRUE COPY OF DETAILED PETITION DATED 04/08/2021 FILED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. Exhibit P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO. 17485/2021 DATED 08/09/2021 RENDERED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.

2025:KER:15910 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER COMMUNICATING EXHIBIT P11 DATED 21/09/2021 TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT DISTRICT COLLECTOR. A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER BEARING NO. C8- 365933/20 DATED 08/11/2021 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR INVITING THE THIRD PETITIONER FOR A HEARING ON THE MATTER ON 17/11/2021. A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 17/11/2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS ALONG WITH ITS ENCLOSURES. A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO. C8-365933/20 DATED 21/12/2021 INDICATING THAT THE CLAIM OF THE PETITIONERS' STANDS REJECTED. A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT BEARING NO. G2/4137/2021 DATED 09/12/2021 FROM THE TAHSILDAR (LR) NORTH PARAVOOR, REFERRED TO IN EXHIBIT P15 ALONG WITH ENCLOSURES. A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT BEARING NO. A9- 3816/2021 DATED 25/10/2021 FROM THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD ROADS DIVISION, ERNAKULAM. A TRUE COPY OF THE BEARING NO. A1/EKMGL/4596/2020 DATED 15/11/2021 FROM THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD ROADS DIVISION ERNAKULAM, REFERRED TO EXHIBIT P15. A TRUE COPY OF LETTER BEARING NO.

A5/7991/2021 DATED 27/12/2021 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY, KADUNGALLOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH. A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, NORTH PARAVOOR IN AS NO. 2/2019 DATED 15/01/2020. A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 03. 11. 2022 ADDRESSED TO THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER KADUNGALLOOR AND ALSO THE REPLY BEARING NO. 10/2022 DATED 21. 11. 2022 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER/PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER

Source: High Court of Kerala. Archive: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.