The court established that non-impleadment of affected parties in petitions leads to suppression of material facts, necessitating proper procedures for encroachment disputes regarding temple properties.

JUDGMENT

Anil K. Narendran, J.

Since common issue is raised, these writ petitions are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. W.P.(C)No.13696 of 2022 is one filed by the Temple Advisory Committee of Udayanapuram Sree Subramanyaswami Temple, which is under the management of the Travancore Devaswom Board. The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 2nd respondent Assistant Devaswom Commissioner to initiate steps to recover, in accordance with law, 8 cents of land belonging to the Travancore Devaswom Board, on the northern side of the Udayanapuram Temple, alleged to have been encroached by the 4th respondent. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the 5th respondent Sub Inspector of Police not to harass the petitioner or the employees of the temple, by insisting to remove the concrete pillars installed in the private road of the Travancore Devaswom Board, as a restriction for the entry of heavy vehicles. The further relief sought for is a writ of mandamus commanding the 5th respondent not to take any action in pursuance of Ext.P1 notice dated 02.04.2022 issued to the 3rd respondent, compelling the petitioner or the employees of the Travancore Devaswom Board to remove the concrete pillars installed in the private road belonging to the Board, as a restriction for the entry of the heavy vehicles.

2.1. On 08.04.2022, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board took notice on admission for respondents 1 to 3. The learned Senior Government Pleader took notice on admission for the 5th respondent. This Court issued urgent notice on admission by special messenger to the 4th respondent, returnable by 12.04.2022. The learned Standing Counsel and also the learned Senior Government Pleader were directed to get instructions.

2.2. On 12.04.2022, when this writ petition came up for consideration before the Vacation Bench, it was observed that the content of Ext.P1 is only to the effect that ingress and egress of the 4th respondent shall not be obstructed and therefore, the Vacation Bench found no reason to pass an ad interim order, as against the same.

3. W.P.(C)No.14763 of 2022 is one filed by the 4th respondent in W.P.(C)No.13696 of 2022 on 25.04.2022, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 3 to forthwith enforce Ext.P6 directive dated 02.04.2022 issued by the 3rd respondent [Ext.P1 in W.P.(C)No.13696 of 2022] and ensure free and unhindered vehicular access to his property, taking into account Ext.P9 order dated 12.04.2022 of the Vacation Bench in W.P.(C)No.13696 of 2022. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 3 to take appropriate action against the 4th respondent, for causing wilful obstruction to a public pathway and endangering the life and liberty of the petitioner and his ailing wife.

3.1. On 29.04.2022, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Government Pleader took notice for respondents 1 to 3. Notice by speed post was ordered to the 4th respondent. In view of Ext.P9 order dated 12.04.2022 of the Vacation Bench in W.P.(C)No.13696 of 2022, a learned Single Judge of this Court granted an interim order directing the 3rd respondent to forthwith enforce Ext.P6 directive and thereby ensure free and unhindered vehicular access to the petitioner9s property.

4. On 19.05.2022, when W.P.(C)No.13696 of 2022 was taken up for consideration, it was brought to the notice of this Court that, on 25.04.2022, the 4th respondent herein filed W.P.(C)No.1476