Kerala High Court
M.S Joy vs The Union Of India on 2 March, 2022
Author: Shaji P. Chaly
Bench: S.Manikumar, Shaji P.Chaly
W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 :1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 20993 OF 2018
PETITIONER/S:
M.S JOY,
AGED 58 YEARS
S/O. LATE SEBASTIAN, ATHIRA, R.C STREET,
NEYYATTINKARA 695 121.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.B.PRADEEP
SMT.V.P.SHEEJA
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF ARCHEOLOGY,
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI 1.
2 THE DIRECTOR OF ARCHEOLOGY
THE ARCHEOLOGICAL DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
SREEPADAM PALACE, FORT P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 023.
3 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY FOR CULTURAL AFFAIRS,
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
4 THE LATIN DIOCESE OF NEYYATTINKARA
REPRESENTED BY ITS BISHOP REV.FR.VINCENT SAMUEL, PIN 695 121.
5 THE IC MARIA CHURCH
NEYYATTINKARA, REPRESENTED BY ITS VICAR FR. V.P.JOSE,
PIN 695 121.
6 ADDL. R6 IMPLEADED:
THE ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA
THRISSUR CIRCLE, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL DIRECTOR,
W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 :2:
OFFICE OF ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA, PURATATTVA BHAVAN,
FF/19A-K.S.H.D FLATS, PULLAZHI, THRISSUR, KERALA-680 012.
(ADDL. R6 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 13.07.2018 IN I.A. NO.
12182/2018)
BY ADVS.
SMT.KEERTHI SOLOMON, CGC
SRI. TEK CHAND, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SRI.N.S.DAYA SINDHU SHREEHARI, CGC
SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA
R4 & R5 BY SRI. RONY JOSE
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
02.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 :3:
Dated this the 2nd day of March, 2022.
JUDGMENT
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
This is a Public Interest Litigation filed by a Parish Member of the IC Maria Church, Neyyattinkara, Thiruvananthapuram District, the 5th respondent, seeking the following reliefs:
1. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondent No.2 to forthwith consider Exts.P5 and P7 applications and do the needful to protect the ancient monument
- Church IC Maria, Neyyattinkara, Thiruvananthapuram.
2. Issue a declaration that the IC Maria Church, Neyyattinkara, is an ancient monument, deserving all statutory protection under Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
3. Direct the first respondent to cause an inspection on the IC Maria Church, Neyyattinkara and do all that is needful to protect the said ancient monument in terms of Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the Parish and the Latin Diocese of Neyyattinkara, the 4th respondent, have taken a decision to demolish the church constructed in the year 1908 during the British regime, which is also an ancient monument. According to the petitioner, some unscrupulous members in the Parish Council prevailed upon the Latin Catholic Diocese and the Parish Church and decided to demolish the super strong ancient monument for personal gains alone. W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 :4:
3. According to the petitioner, the church funds are spent unnecessarily, in spite of opposition from the petitioner and the like minded. He has also produced photographs of the church to show that the archaeological features of the church are unparalleled and since it is 118 years old, it has to be retained as such by making suitable repairs and day-to-day maintenance.
4. The further case of the petitioner is that even though Exts. P5 and P7 representations were made before the statutory authority, namely the Director of Archeology, Archaeological Department, Government of Kerala, the 2nd respondent, no action was initiated to prohibit the Parish and the Diocese from demolishing the ancient church structure. Since after the filing of the writ petition, the church building was demolished to a larger extent, additional documents, including the photographs showing the remains of the demolished church, were produced. It is also submitted by the petitioner that as per the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 ('Act, 1958' for short), the Central Government is duty bound to protect the church as an ancient monument after declaring it as a national monument.
5. The Parish Church and the Latin Diocese has filed a counter affidavit refuting the allegations and the averments made by the writ petitioner, inter alia, stating that the General Body of the church had W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 :5: unanimously decided to pull down the existing church and construct a new one in its place. It is also pointed out that originally a decision was taken by the Parish Council of the church in the year 2010 to demolish the existing church and reconstruct it and that the writ petitioner was one of the then 24 members of the Parish Council which took a decision, and who had not even raised a dissent. The said decision of the Parish Council was placed in the General Body of the church and it was unanimously resolved by the General Body to demolish the church and reconstruct a new one in the place of the old one. There also, the writ petitioner did not raise any dissent. However, in the meanwhile, the writ petitioner could not get elected to the Parish Council, which infuriated him and he has taken a volte face and is trying his level best to sabotage the reconstruction of the church.
6. It is also admitted that the church was constructed in the year 1908. However, the claim raised by the petitioner that it is an ancient monument of national importance, is disputed. That apart, it is submitted that the Director of Archeology, Archaeological Department, Government of Kerala, functioning under the provisions of the Kerala Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1968 ('Act, 1968' for short) has conducted an inspection of the church and as per Ext. R4(a) order dated 03.07.2018, it is declared that the W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 :6: church is not an ancient monument and it does not have any of the features for declaring it as an ancient monument.
7. Anyhow, from Ext. R4(b) dated 22.03.2011, it is clear that the Chief Town Planner has granted sanction as early as on 22.03.2011 for the reconstruction of the building having an area of 23000 sq. m. A building permit was also issued as is evident from Ext. R4(c) dated 14.05.2013, which was renewed as per Ext. R4(d) dated 15.07.2016.
8. An additional affidavit is filed by the Parish dated 3 rd August, 2018 as per the direction issued by this Court, wherein also it is stated that the church was in a dilapidated condition and all religious activities were stopped for the past few months and carrying out the maintenance work over the dilapidated building is not feasible, since it would incur substantial cost. It is also pointed out that the Parish Council met on 21.07.2018 decided to commence the construction work and it was thereupon that the church building was demolished on 23.07.2018 and there was no wilful intention on the part of the Parish members or Diocese to defeat the contentions advanced in the writ petition. Along with the said affidavit, Annexures A2 and A3 decision of the Parish Council dated 23.09.2012 and 03.03.2013 respectively are produced along with a list of members participated in the meeting, from where it is clear that the petitioner was present and the Parish Council has decided to demolish the old dilapidated building. From W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 :7: Annexure A3 dated 03.03.2013, it is evident that the petitioner was entrusted with duties of carrying out the construction work of the new church.
9. The second respondent i.e., the Director of Archeology, Archaeological Department, Thiruvananthapuram, has filed an affidavit basically submitting that the Parish Church in question, though old, is not having any archaeological or artistic importance and it has produced Ext. R2(b) report dated 27.12.2015. Again, the Superintending Archaeologist, the Conservation Engineer and curator were directed, as per letter dated 26.02.2016, to visit the church and examine as to whether the church possess the parameters which are required for declaring the church as a protected monument in tune with the provisions contained in the Act, 1958. The said report dated 07.07.2016 is produced as Ext. R2(c) from where also it is clear that the State authority is of the opinion that the Church has no archaeological relevance, though old. Therefore, according to the Director of Archeology, Archaeological Department, Government of Kerala, only such monuments which meet the required specifications and parameters can only be declared as a protected monument as per Sections 4(1) and 4(3) of the Act, 1968.
10. Anyhow, later, the Archaeological Survey of India functioning as per the provisions of the Act, 1958 was impleaded as W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 :8: the additional respondent No.6 as per order dated 13 th July, 2018 in I.A. No. 12182 of 2018 and the said authority was directed to file a report before this Court. The report filed by the said authority is relevant and important and it reads thus:
"Inspection Report of Immacculate Consumption Church, Nettattinkara, Thiruvananthapuram District Archaeological Survey of India, Thrissur Circle received an Email Communication dated 27.06.2018 and subsequent written representation dated 09.07.2018 from the Cathedral Samrakshanasamithi, a local association of people & devotees, expressing their concern over the 1ssue of proposed demolition of the 110 years old Immaculate Consumption Church at Neyyattinkara in Thiruvananthapuram district.
In view of the alleged demolition of this century old church in the pretext of constructing a new one by the Church Authorities, the Cathedral Samrakshana Samithi had requested this office to assess the heritage value of the church and its structures in order to prevent it from destruction. Considering the apprehension from them, a technical team of Archaeological Survey of India Thrissur Circle inspected the church on 20.07.2018 under intimation to the District Collector, Thiruvananthapuram, Local Police Authorities, Church Authorities and the members of W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 :9: Cathredral Samrakshana Samithi. The following officials were present as members in the technical team of inspection.
1. Ms.Smitha S. Kumar (Superintending Archaeologist I/c)
2. Shri. K. P Rajan (Asst. Superintending Archaeological Engineer)
3. Ms.Gangadevi M.R (Assistant Archaeologist)
4. Shri. Vinuraj B(Assistant Archaeologist)
5. Shri.Umesh T.N (Sr. Conservation Assistant) This report provides a preliminary description of the above mentioned site Inspection and investigations and their results, and will be supplemented in due course by specialist reports and further interpretation if needed by the authorities.
Location of the Church The Immacculate Consumption Church (08° 34' 31.74"" N; 077° 52' 00.75 E, Elevation 31 msl), is located at RC Street, Alummoodu, Neyyatinkara Taluk, Thiruvananthapuram District, which is locally known as AnthikadaPalli. The church is 20km South of Thiruvananthapuram, Capital city of Kerala and can be approached through Thiruvananthapuram Neyyattinkara Poovar road, about 100 meters away from Alummoodu Junction on the R C Street Road. The Church is just 400 meters away from KSRTC Bus station, Neyyattinkara. Nearest Railway Station is Neyyattinkara and Air Port is Thiruvananthapuram W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 : 10 : International Airport.
Brief History of the Church Churches are the most common surviving medieval monument and are usually the oldest surviving building in a parish. In the detail of their dynamic development they can represent, in microcosm, the changing settlement history. They also have an intrinsic interest in representing changng belief and architectural style.
The present structure of the Church situated on the banks of river Neyyar, was built in 1908 as identified from the year written on the top portion of the main facade. In 1996 Pope John Paul declared and elevated the immaculate consumption church, Neyyattinkara as the main cathedral of Neyyattinkara Diocese It is to be noted that Neyyattinkara was an important seat of Latin Catholicism in Kerala when the diocese of Trivandrum was moulded out of the diocese of Cochin and Quilon according to the Bull' In Ora Malabarica' dated July 1937 and this church witnesses to centuries of worship, architectural skill and community history. There are literary evidence that earlier the Franciscans and Dominicans who evangelised Kollam and its suburbs worked in Trivandrum also. Christianity in this region established and also enjoyed the religious toleration of Travancore Rajas, inspite there were persecution in between 1600 and 1604, Many Rajas contributed to the reconstruction of churches in this areas W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 : 11 : may be reconstructed ones.
Church Architecture The church is situated in 0.94 acre land in the southern corner of the compound wall. The church, parish house and the cemetery covers only 50% of the total area where as equal amount of the area is left unused.
This church shows the fusion of colonial cum vernacular architecture of Kerala. The church is facing east. It is rectangular in plan and consist 16 pillars in two columns dividing the church in to central nave and side aisles. The altar and vestry are in the rare end of the church and contain 4 pillars. The church is having a magnificent façade divided in to tripartite by ornamental pilasters and three Gothic arch entrance doors. North east corner of the church is having a granite baptismal font affixed to the wall which is feature of early churches in Kerala. The central nave of the church has two rows of wooden benches arranged in between the pillars. The floor of the church is paved with clay tiles of reasonable size (30cm X15 cm).
The altar area/ madbaha on the western end is emphasized by its loftiness whlch contain 4 pillars and having a false ceiling with wooden planks. The wooden ceiling portion of the altar separated from the prayer hall by a gable partition with wooden planks. The old wooden altar is replaced with new using cement and P;ywood. The original clay tile floor is also redone in marble. The wooden W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 : 12 : plank ceiling is still intact, which has been concealed by white cloth covering. The vestry behind the altar and is the only modern accretion in the church. The figurine of Virgin Mary in the altar and the main bell in the facade of the church are brought from Belgium in an early period. The central portion of the facade is having the construction date 1908 written in figures which is now concealed using paint.
The pointed arch windows and jail/crassi works consisting floral patterns and Latin cross enhances the traditional beauty of the church. Further the buttress in the exterior side portion of the church in between each arch window and doors are a visual treat. Further the arch windows of the church are massive and of human size. Similarly, the door and window frames below the arch portions are monoliths made of heavy granite slabs which act as frame as well as load bearing structural members. The door and window shutters are wooden battened and framed type. The door and window fixtures are of traditional type and commonly found in old buildings. The considerable thickness of the Wall portion is also a noteworthy feature of this heritage building. Pillars There are totally 16 pillars, out of which 4 stands in the altar area, These Octagonal pillars are assumed to be of Belgium style which is a feature of the early church architecture in Kerala. The pillars of the church itself are W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 : 13 : having lots of architectural patterns. The bases of the pillars are having more width which gradually decreases towards the top with ornamental features in between. All the pillars were interlinked above the top middle level with wooden beams and each pillar have wooden cross beams which are connected to the wall plate on the outer walls on both sides of the church.
Roof The church is having a traditional slopped tiled roof. Both front and rear side gabled walls are supporting the ridged roof which is having wall plates on both side long walls. Another set of two parallel wall plates are running through the top of the pillars which are tied with wooden tie beams above each pillars. Series of rafters are placed in positions on both side with wooden cross joists and ties Above the rafters reapers are running in uniform space which held the traditional pathy tiles Cemetery The adjacent cemetery of the church is situated in the south western side of the church and contains old as well as new graves. The oldest grave in the cemetery contains the record of the date i.e. 1926 and is of typical colonial nature. The western part of the cemetery area contains granite cross. Conservation issues The overall structural condition is comparatively normal and need to attend some urgent maintenance work.W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 : 14 :
For better preservation it will be appropriate to carry out thorough repair work to the traditional Kerala tile roof by replacing the damaged wooden roof members such as, rafters, beams, etc. (to an extent of 20% of total quantity of roof members) with new wooden members, and refixing all the members in proper position then attending anti termite treatment and applying wood preservative oil to all the wooden members then reroofing using to an average 30% old tiles and 70% new tiles. Outer walls can bring in to original colour and texture by cleaning and removing the existing paint coating and do lime mortar pointing. The inner walls needs patch plastering in lime mortar in some portions. Doors and windows needs minor repairs and the floor area can be properly maintained by replacing the damaged clay tiles with new ones.
Remarks/Conclusion:
The church was the center of medieval life and it should surely occupy a key part of any strategy dealing with the period .The history of the churches also forms part of the history of Christendom in Kerala. Kerala is regarded as the cradle of Christianity in India because of its rich tradition and evidences. The evidence regarding the The evidence regarding the year in which the Immaculate Consumption Church, Neyyattinkara is clear from the facade. It is definitely a structure having archaeological and heritage value in terms of churches and churchyards. The setting and W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 : 15 : context of church and churchyard, visually as part of landscape or townscape, and historically in terms of the settlement plan and the wider settlement pattern, for what these can tell about continuity of religious use in places, and how the church and its activities have related to the community down the ages. Contents of buildings, including fixtures and fittings, tombs in cemetery, evidence for past burial practices and movable items of value, for their intrinsic aesthetic and cultural significance and associations with a place are of great importance. Much of the history and structural sequence of a church can be 'read' from a careful study of such buildings which will contribute to the history of Christianity in Kerala and conserving and preserving such buildings needs to' be done. In this context, it is to be considered that in the Apostolic Exhortation, Exhortation, SacramentumCaritatis', the Pontiff states, "A solid knowledge of the history of sacred art can be advantageous for those responsible for commissioning artists and architects to crate works of art for the liturgy. Consequently, it is essential that the education of Seminaians and priests include the study of art history, with special reference to sacred buildings...."
11. Therefore, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the report filed by the Archaeological Survey of India shows that the church in question is very ancient and there is a need for W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 : 16 : protecting the same in accordance with the provisions of the Act, 1958. The petitioner has also produced additional documents along with various interlocutory applications, and the photographs of the ancient church and its facade are also produced.
12. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner Sri. K. B. Pradeep, Sri. Rony Jose for the Parish and the Latin Diocese, learned Senior Government Pleader Sri. Tek Chand for the State, the third respondent, and Smt. N. S. Dayasindhu Sreehari, learned Central Government Counsel, and perused the pleadings and materials on record.
13. The sole question to be considered is whether the Parish Church constructed in the year 1908 can be declared by this Court as an ancient monument as per the provisions of the Act, 1958. The report of the National Authority extracted above would make it clear that the church is said to be a very ancient one constructed in the year 1908, which is an undisputed fact, since it is even admitted by the Parish Church and the Latin Diocese.
14. The question that emerges for consideration is whether it can be declared as an archaeological site, to be of national importance. As we have pointed out above, the State Authority has visited the church and later appointed a committee to visit the church and report as to whether it has got any archaeological relevance of national W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 : 17 : importance and it is found that even though it is an old church, there is no archaeological importance to declare the same as a monument to be of national importance.
15. The Central Act, 1958 was brought into force on and with effect from 28th August, 1958 to provide for the preservation of ancient and historical monuments and archaeological sites and remains of national importance, for the regulation of archaeological excavations and for the protection of sculptures, carvings and other like objects.
16. Section 2(a) thereto defines 'ancient monuments to mean any structure, erection or monument, or any tumulus or place of interment, or any cave, rock sculpture, inscription or monolith, which is of historical, archaeological or artistic interest and which has been in existence for not less than one hundred years, and includes (i) the remains of an ancient monument, (ii) the site of an ancient monument, (iii) such portion of land adjoining the site of an ancient monument as may be required for fencing or covering in or otherwise preserving such monument, and (iv) the means of access to, and convenient inspection of, an ancient monument.
17. The term 'competent authority' is defined under Section 2(db) to mean an officer not below the rank of Director of archaeology or Commissioner of archeology of the Central or State Government or equivalent rank, specified, by notification in the Official Gazette, as the W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 : 18 : competent authority by the Central Government to perform functions under the Act.
18. The term 'protected monument' is defined under Section 2(j) to mean an ancient monument, which is declared to be of national importance by or under the Act.
19. Therefore, on a reading of the aforesaid definitions under the Act, 1958, it is clear that a protected monument means any ancient monument, which is declared to be of national importance by or under the Act, 1958 and an ancient monument is defined to mean any structure etc. having historical or archaeological or artistic interest and it has been in existence for not less than 100 years.
20. Whatever that be, Section 3 deals with certain ancient monuments, etc., deemed to be of national importance and Section 4 deals with the power of Central Government to declare ancient monuments, etc., to be of national importance, and they read thus:
3. Certain ancient monuments, etc., deemed to be of national importance.―All ancient and historical monuments and all archaeological sites and remains which have been declared by the Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains (Declaration of National Importance) Act, 1951 (71 of 1951), or by section 126 of the States Reorganisations Act, 1956 (37 of 1956), to be of national importance shall be deemed to be ancient and historical monuments or archaeological sites and remains declared to be of national importance for the purposes of this Act.
4. Power of Central Government to declare ancient W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 : 19 : monument, etc., to be of national importance.―(1) Where the Central Government is of opinion that any ancient monument or archaeological site and remains not included in section 3 is of national importance, it may, by notification in the Official Gazette, give two months' notice of its intention to declare such ancient monument or archaeological site and remains to be of national importance; and a copy of every such notification shall be affixed in a conspicuous place near the monument or site and remains, as the case may be.
(2) Any person interested in any such ancient monument or archaeological site and remains may, within two months after the issue of the notification, object to the declaration of the monument, or the archaeological site and remains, to be of national importance. (3) On the expiry of the said period of two months, the Central Government may, after considering the objections, if any, received by it, declare by notification in the Official Gazette, the ancient monument or the archaeological site and remains, as the case may be, to be of national importance.
(4) A notification published under sub-section (3) shall, unless and until it is withdrawn, be conclusive evidence of the fact that the ancient monument or the archaeological site and remains to which it relates is of national importance for the purposes of this Act."
21. On an analysis of Section 3 of the Act, 1958, it is clear that the church in question is not declared as an ancient monument. Section 4 confers power on the central Government to declare ancient monuments, if the Central Government is of opinion that any ancient monument or archaeological site and remains not included in section 3 is of national importance and it may, by notification in the Official Gazette, give two months' notice of its intention to declare such W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 : 20 : ancient monument or archaeological site and remains to be of national importance.
22. The above extracted report of the Central Authority would also show that it has found the church to be an ancient one and it has got its own archaeological relevance. But, nowhere in the report it is recommended to be declared as an ancient monument of national importance.
23. In that view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that the declaration sought for by the petitioner in the writ petition to declare the church as an archaeological site, to be of national importance cannot be granted by this Court. As per Section 4 of the Act, 1958, it is for the Central Government to declare any site as an ancient monument of national importance. The provisions of Act, 1958 also shows that merely because a construction is an ancient monument, that cannot be declared as an ancient monument under the Act, if it is not having sufficient relevance of national importance.
24. Yet another factor that to be considered by this Court is with respect to the bona fides of the petitioner, who is a Parish member of the 5th respondent Parish. The documents produced along with the counter affidavit filed by the 4 th respondent would show that the petitioner participated in the parish council meetings which have decided to demolish the existing church and reconstruct a new one to W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 : 21 : meet up with the need of the day. In fact, one of the documents produced by the church shows that the petitioner was endowed with duties in the matter of demolition and reconstruction of the church and to communicate with the sponsor of the church construction. However, the church has a contention that in the election to the Parish Church, the petitioner was not elected, which infuriated him to turn around the church and approach the authorities under the Act, 1968 seeking appropriate declaration under the State Act, 1958, which can only be seen as a genuine one in the light of the documents and pleadings.
25. Therefore, we doubt the bona fides of the petitioner and it can only be legally presumed that there is no public interest involved in the subject issue. We also find that the Parish Church as well as the General Body of the church has taken a decision to demolish the church and construct a new one. It was thereafter that sanction was secured from the Town Planner and the permit from the Local Body.
26. It is also evident that the permit when expired was renewed in the year 2016 and only two years thereafter, the writ petition was filed before this Court. It is also evident that the petitioner has filed representations to the Director of Archeology, Archaeological Department, Government of Kerala, only in the year 2018, evident from Exts.P5 and P7.
27. Taking into account all the above aspects, we are of the W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 : 22 : considered opinion that the petitioner has not made out any case requiring interference of this Court and also to grant the reliefs as are sought for by the writ petitioner.
Needless to say, the writ petition fails and accordingly, it is dismissed.
sd/-
S. MANIKUMAR, CHIEF JUSTICE.
sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE.
Rv W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 : 23 : APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20993/2018 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE FRONT ELEVATION OF THE CHURCH.
EXHIBIT P2. COPY OF THE INTERIORS OF THE CHURCH.
EXHIBIT P3. COPY OF THE FRONT WALL OF THE CHURCH SHOWING ITS DATE OF ESTABLISHMENT.
EXHIBIT P4. COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE FRONT WALL OF THE CHURCH WITH THE DATE OF ESTABLISHMENT MARKED.
EXHIBIT P5. COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE CATHEDRAL SAMRAKSHANA SAMITHI DATED 02.01.2018 ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXHIBIT P6. COPY OF THE NEWSPAPER REPORT REGARDING THE PUBLIC PROTEST AGAINST THE DEMOLITION OF THE ANCIENT CHURCH ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXHIBIT P7. COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 23.04.2018 BY THE PETITIONER AS REMINDER TO EXHIBIT P5 ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 23.06.2018 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE ADDL. 6TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY ADDL.
6TH RESPONDENT DATED 27.06.2018 ADDRESSED TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS 4 IN NUMBERS EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 22.07.2018 ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 23.07.2018 OF THE SUPREINTENDING ARCHAEOLOGIST ADDRESSED TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR.
EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT ON THEIR INSPECTION CONDUCTED ON 20.07.2018 DRAWN UP BY THE ADDL. 6TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 30.07.2018 ISSUED BY THE ADDL. 6TH RESPONDENT ADDRESSED W.P.(C) No. 20993/2018 : 24 : TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 06.08.2018 BEARING NO.DCTVM/2336/2018-S11 BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
EXT.R4(a): TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03.07.2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXT.R4(b): TRUE COPY OF THE SANCTION ORDER DATED 22.03.2011 ISSUED BY THE CHIEF TOWN PLANNER ALONG WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXT.R4(c): TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 14.05.2013.
EXT.R4(d): TRUE COPY OF THE RENEWED BUILDING PERMIT DATED 15.07.2016.
ANNEXURE A1: TRUE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE DESIGN FOR THE NEW CHURCH.
ANNEXURE A2: TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE PARISH COMMITTEE MEETING DATED 23.09.2012 AND ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
ANNEXURE A3: TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE PARISH COMMITTEE MEETING DATED 03.03.2013 AND ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXHIBIT R2(a): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 06.11.2015 RECEIVED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT R2(b): TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 27.12.2015 ALONG WITH ITS TRANSLATION.
EXHIBIT R2(c): TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 07.07.2016 ALONG WITH ITS TRANSLATION.
EXHIBIT R6(1): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 02.01.2018 SENT BY CATHEDRAL SAMRAKSHANA SAMITHI.
EXHIBIT R6(2): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER F. NO.TSR/GC/TECH/2018-191257 DATED 27.06.2018 ISSUED BY THE SUPERINTENDING ARCHAEOLOGIST, THRISSUR.
EXHIBIT R6(3): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER F. NO. TSR/GC/TECH/2018-19/1359 DATED 15.07.2018.
EXHIBIT R6(4) TRUE COPY OF THE INSPECTION REPORT WITH PHOTOS OF THE CHURCH SUBMITTED BY THE SUPERINTENDING ARCHAEOLOGIST, THRISSUR.
/True Copy/ P.S to Judge.
rv