St.Mary'S Orthodox Cathedral v. Revenue Divisional Officer Adoor & ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:- THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2015/10TH ASHADHA, 1937 W.P.(C).No.17705 of 2010 (K) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

-------------------------- ST.MARY'S ORTHODOX CATHEDRAL, THUMPOMON, PATHANAMTHITTA, REPRESENTED BY ITS VICAR FR. K.M.THOMAS.

BY SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA). RESPONDENT(S):- ----------------------------

1. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA.

2. TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, ADOOR.

3. C.G. RAJU, CHUTTUPARAVILAYIL, THUMPAMON, ADOOR TALUK.

4. P.S.ZACHARIAH, PUNNAMTHATTATHIL, THUMPAMON, ADOOR TALUK.

5. C.G. JOY, CHUTTUPARAVILAYIL, THUMPAMON, ADOOR TALUK.

R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MANOJ P.KUNJACHAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-

WP(C).No.17705 of 2010 (K) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:- --------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 12.11.2009 FILED BY PETITIONER TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 9.4.10 PASSED BY FIRST RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:- ----------------------------------------- NIL vku/- [ true copy ]

K. Vinod Chandran, J -------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.17705 of 2010-K ------------------------------------- Dated this the 01st day of July, 2015

JUDGMENT

The petitioner-Church is aggrieved with Exhibit P3 order. Admittedly there was some dispute raised as per Exhibit P1 on the issue of burial of the community members raised by respondents 3 to 5. Though they were impleaded and notice served on them, none appeared. On the basis of the complaint, the Revenue Divisional Officer [RDO] passed an order at Exhibit P3, the operative portion of which is extracted hereunder:

¿ß ÉUßÏáæ¿ È¿JßMá Ø¢ÌtßçoîÞ, "

¥ØíÅßÄb¢ Ø¢ÌtßçoîÞ ©U ÄVAJßW ̈ çμÞ¿Äß §¿æÉ¿áKßÜï.å¦ÏÄßÈí ØßÕßW çμÞ¿Äß Îáç¶È ÉøßÙÞø¢ μÞçÃIáKÄÞÃí.å®KÞW ÉUßÏßæÜ ÏÅÞVj §¿ÕμÞ¢·BZ ¦ÏßøáKÕV §çMÞZ ̄æÄCßÜᢠμÞøÃJÞW ¦øÞÇÈÏíAá¢, Îxᢠ®JáKßæÜïCßWçÉÞÜᢠÉUßÏßæÜ çø¶μZ dÉμÞø¢ §¿ÕμÞ¢·BZ ®Kí μæIJáÕÞX μÝßÏáK Éf¢ §JøAÞøáæ¿ Õà¿áμ{ßW ©IÞμáK Îøâ μÃAßæÜ¿áJí ¿ß ÎãÄÖøàøBZ ÕßÕßÇ çμÞ¿Äß ÕßÇßμ{áæ¿ ¥¿ßØíÅÞÈJßW ¥¿A¢ æoÏîáKÄßÈí §çMÞÝæJ Íøà ØÎßÄß ØÍÞ ÄÞWMøc¢ ÎÞxßÕoîí, ÎÞÈá×ßμ Éøß·ÃÈ μâ¿ß ÈWμß, ÙßÄ ÉøßçÖÞÇÈÏíAí ÕßçÇÏÎÞAÃæÎKí §ÄßÈÞW ©JøÕÞμáKá. å "

WP(C).No.17705 of 2010 - 2 -

2. A reading of the above extract would indicate that the RDO has only expressed a pious wish that the Church authorities would consider the case of the respondents 3 to 5 in a sympathetic manner laced with humanitarian considerations. Exhibit P3 has no binding force. In the above circumstance, the writ petition is disposed of, making it clear that Exhibit P3 is not one issued under any of the provisions of law. Needless to say, that, the Church display grace in its actions.

Sd/- K.Vinod Chandran Judge.

vku/- [ true copy ]