Konnallur Jamath Mosque Ananthavur Po and K.K. Saithali vs State of Kerala and Others

R. Basant, J.—The Petitioners have come to this Court with this petition for issue directions to Respondents 2 and 3, police officials under the 1st Respondent State, to afford protection to the Petitioners'' life and property against illegal, contumacious, culpable and violent conduct of Respondents 4 to 6.

The 1st Petitioner is a Mosque and the 2nd Petitioner is the president of the Mosque committee. According to the Petitioners, the property belongs to a wakf and it has got settled boundary with the road on the western side of the property. According to them, there is an attempt by Respondents 4 to 6, who represent local people, to widen the pathway by encroaching upon the property belonging to the Petitioners. According to the Petitioners, Respondents 4 to 6 have no right whatsoever to trespass into the property and widen the pathway. The attempt is to snatch away the property of the Petitioners, complain the Petitioners. It is, in these circumstances, that the Petitioners claim issue of directions to Respondents 1 to 3 to afford police protection to them.

Evidently the dispute is one relating to the boundary on the western side of the Petitioners'' property. Though it is contended that there is a firm boundary on the western side, it is evident that there is a dispute regarding the boundary. Some people appear to assert and raise a dispute about the precise lie of the boundary. The civil court has not made any pronouncement on that dispute. We are of the opinion that, in these circumstances, it is for the Petitioners to go to the civil court and seek redressal of their grievance. This Court in proceedings under Article 226 cannot obviously fix the boundary between the two properties. The police cannot be vested with jurisdiction to decide the precise lie of the boundary. We are, in these circumstances, not satisfied that any directions under Article 226 of the Constitution deserves to be issued.

This Writ petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed. But we make it clear that this judgment shall not in any way fetter the rights of the Petitioners to approach the civil court/Tribunal and seek appropriate relief. Needless to say, no 3 observations in this judgment will in any way affect the rights of the Petitioners.