SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 76456

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
RADHA RAJAGOPAL – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) 37742/2018



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON &

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR FRIDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 12TH MAGHA, 1940 W.P(C).No.37742 of 2018 PETITIONER/S:

1 RADHA RAJAGOPAL, AGED 62 YEARS, W/O RAJAGOPAL, KRISHNAKRIPA, PARAYAMTHAZHATHU LANE, PALLIPARAMBUKAVU, THRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT- 682 301.

2 SULOCHANA GOPI AGED 51 YEARS W/O. GOPI, CHERANADPARAMBU, NEAR PLAY GROUND, ELAMKULAM, KOCHI-682 020.

3 REGI T K P, AGED 63 YEARS S/O.PARAMESWARAN K.A., 39/104, LAKSHMI APARTMENT, KARIKKAMURI CROSS ROAD, KOCHI-682 011.

BY ADVS.

SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.)

SRI.K.R.RAJKUMAR RESPONDENT/S:

1 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAURAM-695 001.

2 TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003.

3 STATE POLICE CHIEF, KERALA STATE, POLICE HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 695 001.

4 THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PATHANAMTHITTA-683 645.

5 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA-683 645.

BY ADVS.

SRI.P.NARAYANAN, SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER SRI.S.RAJMOHAN, SC, TDB SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY, SENIOR GOVT.PLEADER SRI.V.MANU, SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON

01.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

P.R.Ramachandra Menon, J.

The petitioners have moved this Court with the following prayers:-

“i) To call for the records leading upto Exhibit PI and quash the same by the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction.

ii) To declare Exhibit P1 order purportedly issued under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is patently violative of Articles 19, 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India and therefore, void, inoperative and unenforceable and set aside.

iii) To issue a Writ of Mandamus or other directions forbidding anyone of the respondents from prohibiting the entry of the petitioners into Sannidhanam including by chanting of mantras or such other prayers in exercise of their religious rights during the entire journey to Sannidhanam and back by any kind of interruption whatever or prevention by the 5th respondent or anyone under him.

iv) To issue such other writs, orders or directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. It is seen from the pleadings and proceedings that this Court had occasion to deal with the issue and had passed various interim orders at different points of time clubbing the matter along with such other connected matters. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the 'Mandalam-Makaravilakku' season is already over and the cause of action does not survive any more.

3. The issue stands purely academic. Time of this Court need not be wasted for the purpose of considering mere 'academic issue', in view of the law declared by the Supreme Court in Bholanath Mukerjee Vs. Ramakrishna Mission Vivekananda Century College & ors. [(2011) 5 SCC 464]

In the said circumstances, the writ petition stands closed without dealing with the matter on merits. The legal questions raised, if any, are left open.

Sd/-

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE Sd/-

N.ANIL KUMAR JUDGE skj APPENDIX OF WP(C) 37742/2018 PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.

DCPTA/8522/2018-B3 DATED 15.11.2018 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top