Petitioners' fundamental right to practice religion must be protected, and the Waqf Board directed to resolve the mosque dispute expeditiously.

JUDGMENT :

N.NAGARESH, J.

The petitioners, who are persons belonging to Kongal at Paravur, Kollam, have filed this writ petition seeking to command respondents 2, 5 and 6 to afford adequate police protection to the life and property of the petitioners enabling them to attend the Juma prayers and other religious activities in the Town Mosque at Chillakkal.

2. The Chillakkal Muslim Jama-ath originally had a Mosque near seashore. The petitioners state that the Jama-ath constructed another Mosque in the town near the Main Road. The prayers were conducted in both the Mosques. The present Jama-ath Committee decided to hold the prayers in the Old Mosque alone. The petitioners would submit that the decision of the present Jama-ath is illegal. The petitioners are entitled to exercise their fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution of India to have prayers at the place of their choice. Jama-ath cannot unilaterally stop the prayers in the Town Mosque.

3. Respondents 9 to 11 entered appearance and resisted the writ petition. Respondents 9 to 11 submitted that the Old Mosque is near seashore over an extent of land of 1.5 Acres. During the reconstruction of the Old Mosque, the Friday prayers alone were shifted to the Town Mosque on a temporary basis. After reconstruction of the Old Mosque, by Ext.R9(d) resolution, the Jama-ath decided to shift back the prayers to the Old Mosque.

4. The petitioners resisted the move and caused physical obstructions. On the basis of a complaint, Ext.R9(e) FIR was filed against the petitioners.

5. When the matter was taken up to the District Collector, the District Collector took Ext.P5 decision. Ext.P5 decision is that the prayers should be held in both the Mosques till Ramsan and thereafter a final decision should be taken on the advice of Mushavara. Respondents 9 to 11 relying on Ext.R12(a) urged that the District Mushavara has already taken a decision that the Juma prayers should be confined to the Old Mosque.

6. The 12^th respondent pointed out that the Town Mosque is a new building in respect of which a Building Completion Certificate has not been issued by the Local Self Government Institution so far. It will not be safe for the devotees to hold prayers in the new Mosque.

7. Government Pleader submits that whenever complaints were received, the matter was enquired into and FIR was filed. As of now there is no law and order problem. If there is a likelihood of law and order issue, the police will promptly interfere in the matter.

8. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 to 7, the learned counsel representing respondents 9 to 11, the learned counsel appearing for the 12^th respondent and the learned Standing Counsel representing the 8^th respondent.

9. The facts are not much in dispute. The original Old Mosque of the Jama-ath was situated near the seashore on an extent of land of 1.5 Acres. The Friday prayers were shifted to the new Town Mosque in between. Respondents 9 to 11 would contend that such shifting of Friday prayers was only to facilitate renovation of the Old Mosque at the seashore. When the reconstruction was over, the Jama-ath decided to shift back the prayers to the Old Mosque.

10. When the issue was brought before the District Collector, Ext.P5 decision was taken by the District Collector. The decision was that till the expiry of Ramsan period, prayers should be conducted in both the Mosques. After Ramsan, the devotees should maintain peace till the Mushavara takes a decision in the matter. Respondents 9 to 11 pointed out that District Mushavara has taken Ext.R12(a) decision whereunder the Mushavara has directed to conduct prayers