Temple land casemhc bench refuse to stay judge mahadevan order bench PARESH UPADHYAY, J. and SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J.     (Order of the Court was made by PARESH UPADHYAY, J.) Learned Additional Advocate General has taken this Court through the conclusions/ final directions recorded by learned single Judge, more particularly contained in para 22 of the impugned order. T.Kokilavane, learned advocate accepts notice on behalf of the first respondent in W.A.No.64 of 2022 and for the fourth respondent in W.A.No.74 of 2022. Mr.V.B.R.Menon, learned advocate accepts notice for the first respondent in W.A.No.72 of 2022 and Mr.A.Radhakrishnan, party-in-person, appears for the first respondent in W.A.No.74 of 2022. Mr.T.Chandrasekaran, learned Special Government Pleader (H.R. & C.E.) accepts notice on behalf of respondents 2 and 3 in W.A.No.64 of 2022, second respondent in W.A.No.72 of 2022 and for respondents 2 and 3 in W.A.No.74 of 2022.

W.A.Nos.64, 72 and 74 of 2022 and

C.M.P.Nos.619, 664 and 670 of 2022

PARESH UPADHYAY, J. and

SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J.

(Order of the Court was made by PARESH UPADHYAY, J.)

Challenge in this group of appeals is made to the common order passed by learned single Judge dated 04 November 2020 recorded on W.P.Nos.17248, 19258, 32091 and 33667 of 2013, 5159, 21654 and 21712 of 2018. These three appeals are filed against the order in W.P.Nos.5159, 21712 and 21654 of 2018.

2. Learned Additional Advocate General has taken this Court through the conclusions/ final directions recorded by learned single Judge, more particularly contained in para 22 of the impugned order.
3. T.Kokilavane, learned advocate accepts notice on behalf of the first respondent in W.A.No.64 of 2022 and for the fourth respondent in W.A.No.74 of 2022. Mr.V.B.R.Menon, learned advocate accepts notice for the first respondent in W.A.No.72 of 2022 and Mr.A.Radhakrishnan, party-in-person, appears for the first respondent in W.A.No.74 of 2022. Mr.T.Chandrasekaran, learned Special Government Pleader (H.R. & C.E.) accepts notice on behalf of respondents 2 and 3 in W.A.No.64 of 2022, second respondent in W.A.No.72 of 2022 and for respondents 2 and 3 in W.A.No.74 of 2022.
4. Issue notice to third respondent in W.A.No.72 of 2022 and respondents 1 and 5 in W.A.No.74 of 2022 returnable by 07.03.2022. Private notice is also permitted. It would be open to the appellants to serve third respondent in W.A.No.72 of 2022 and respondents 1 and 5 in W.A.No.74 of 2022 by Registered Post with Acknowledgement Due.
5. Learned Additional Advocate General has pressed for stay of the impugned judgment / order, inter alia contending that now contempt proceedings are filed by the writ petitioners and the concerned Bench is seized of the matter. We find that more than one year has passed by this time since the impugned order is dated 04.11.2020 and further prima facie, we do not find that some gross error in the impugned order. Therefore, the request for stay of the impugned judgment is rejected, at this stage, leaving it open to the parties to renew this request at the time of further hearing of these appeals.
6. With a view to see that controversy of such nature should not be kept pending for long, list on 07.03.2022.

(P.U.J.)      (S.S.K.J.)          28.01.2022

mmi/9

PARESH UPADHYAY, J. and SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J.

mmi

W.A.Nos.64, 72 and 74 of 2022

28.01.2022