Government's failure to act against encroachments upheld, previous court's decisions confirmed ownership despite ongoing possession claims.

JUDGMENT

Raja Vijayaraghavan V, J.

In the year 2010, a Writ Petition was filed by one D. Sathyan, as W.P.(C) No. 24590 of 2010, and by judgment dated 18.11.2015, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P5, this Court had observed as under:

"The complaint of the petitioner is that certain lands belonging to Travancore Devaswom Board and referable to the Kumaramangalam Valliyanikad Bhagavathi temple are in the possession of strangers including the private respondents in this writ petition. Some of the private respondents pointed out that they have obtained decrees, which are confirmed by the superior courts. All that is required in the present scenario is to direct the fourth respondent to look into whether the immovable properties of the afore-noted temple are properly secured. If any action is due against any person in accordance with law, that shall be initiated; subject to all defences that may be available to any person, including on the basis of decrees noted above."

2. The petitioner herein claims that they are the Upadesaka Samithi of the Valliyanikad Bhagavathi Temple. Their grievance in this W rit Petition is that though there is a binding judgment delivered by this Court at the instance of D. Sathyan, the respondent Nos. 1 to 4, who are duty-bound to protect the property having an extent of 75.06 Ares in Survey No. 359/6 of the Kumaramangalam Village, having Old Survey No. 878/1-5-7, have failed in their duty and have not initiated any steps to evict the encroachers. Instead, they have permitted the property to be in occupation by the 5th respondent and others. The petitioners rely on Ext.P1 field plan, Ext.P2 Basic Tax Register (BTR) and Ext.P3 settlement register, to substantiate that the property belongs t o the temple. It is on these assertions that this Writ Petition was filed seeking the following relief:

(i) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 4th respondent in the light of Ext P5 to take steps to complete the process of carrying out the measurements and to prepare the necessary records in that regard and ultimately to get back all the temple properties encroached upon by the respondents 5 to 9 or by such other persons as are found to be in occupation of the same, within stipulated time limits in the interest of justice.

3. At the time of filing of the Writ Petition, the sons of one Janardhanan were arrayed as respondents 5 and 6 together with subsequent assignees of the property in question. In the course of proceedings, additional respondents were impleaded, contending that the encroachers of temple property have assigned land to the private respondents.

4. In the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent Nos. 2 to 4, it is stated that pursuant to the judgment rendered by this Court on 18.11.2015, the Special Tahsildar had conducted a detailed inquiry. In pursuance to the enquiry, the following facts were revealed.

"5. Based on the above direction, the Special Tahsildar conducted a detailed enquiry. In the enquiry, following facts are revealed. Kumaramangalam Valliyanikadu Bhagavathy Temple is situated in old Sy. No.878/6 of Kumaramangalam Village, Thodupuzha Taluk. As per the settlement register, the temple is having 27 cents of land in Sy.No.878/6. As per the Re-Survey records, the temple premises is situated in Re- Sy.No.359/5, Block No.9 of Kumaramangalam Village and the extent of property of the temple is shown as 11.10 Ares (27.417 cents). The temple pond is situated in Re-Sy No.359/4 and the extent is 2.3 Ares (5.68 cents). When compared to old revenue records, it is revealed th