Ibrahimkutty Haji Vs State of Kerala — Kerala HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Ibrahimkutty Haji Vs State of Kerala — Kerala HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the appointment of the 2nd respondent as Kazi under Ext.P1 (Section 2, Kazis Act, 1880) was invalid for want of legal formalities and for lack of consent of the majority of local residents, given the claim that the 3rd respondent was already functioning as Kazi.

Court's answer

There is no procedure prescribed under Section 2 of the Kazis Act, 1880 for making an appointment as Kazi, and no grounds were pointed out to find the Ext.P1 appointment illegal.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner's remedy is not a writ challenge but to move the Government, if so advised, for removal of the 2nd respondent on the grounds mentioned under Section 2, if such grounds are made out.

Key takeaways

The writ petition has no merit and is dismissed without prejudice to any of the petitioner's contentions in O.S.No.77 of 2019 pending before the Munsiff Court, Parappanangadi.ratio¶42

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition challenging the Government of Kerala's notification dated 06.03.2019 (Ext.P1) appointing the 2nd respondent as Kazi for Tirurangadi Municipality Divisions 9, 10 and 24 to 31 of Tirurangadi Village, Tirurangadi Taluk, Malappuram District, under Section 2 of the Kazis Act, 1880, on the ground that legal formalities were not followed and that the majority of local residents did not want the appointment, the 3rd respondent allegedly functioning as Kazi. Held: Section 2 prescribes no procedure for appointment as Kazi and no grounds were pointed out rendering Ext.P1 illegal; per the statement filed for the 1st respondent, power to appoint Kazis vests in the Government, whose decision under Section 2 is conclusive, and more than one Kazi may be appointed for an area. The petitioner's only course is to move the Government for removal of the 2nd respondent on grounds under Section 2, if made out. Writ petition dismissed without prejudice to the petitioner's contentions in O.S.No.77 of 2019 (Munsiff Court, Parappanangadi), a suit seeking an injunction against appointing any Kazi in the Tirurangadi or Chemmad Mahal without the people's agreement.

WP(C) NO. 14010 OF 2019

1

2025:KER:27989

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.

WEDNESDAY, THE 2^ND DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 12TH CHAITHRA, 1947

WP(C) NO. 14010 OF 2019

PETITIONER:

IBRAHIMKUTTY HAJI AGED 69 YEARS S/O. MOIDENKUTTY HAJI, PALASSERY MATTUMMAL HOUSE, CHEMMAD, TRIKKULAM AMSOM DESOM, POST TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,PIN-676 306

BY ADVS. T.KRISHNANUNNI (SR.) SRI.VINOD RAVINDRANATH SMT.MEENA.A. SMT.M.R.MINI SRI.ASHWIN SATHYANATH SRI.ROHIT NANDAKUMAR

RESPONDENTS:

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY LAW SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 001

2 SAYYED IBRAHIM-UL KHALEEL THANGAL, S/O. AHAMMED BUKHARI, VALLIKUNNU AMSOM, KADALUNDI DESOM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-673 302

3 O.K.ABDULLAKUTTY MAKDOOMI, S/O.MOODAKUTTY MUSALIYAR, KAZHI HOUSE, AZAD NAGAR, TIRURANGADI POST, MALAPPURAM ,PIN-676 306

BY ADVS. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)

WP(C) NO. 14010 OF 2019

2

2025:KER:27989

OTHER PRESENT:

SMT.SURYA BINOY, SR.GP

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) NO. 14010 OF 2019

3

2025:KER:27989

MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J

............................................................

WP(C)No.14010 of 2019

.............................................................

Dated this the 02^nd day of April, 2025

JUDGMENT

The petitioner challenges the appointment of the 2^nd respondent as a Kazi for the local area comprised in Tirurangadi Municipality Divisions 9, 10 and 24 to 31 of Tirurangadi Village in Tirurangadi Taluk of Malappuram District. He challenges Ext.P1 appointment, contending that the same was issued without following the legal formalities and that apart from a very few persons in the locality, the majority never wanted the 2^nd respondent to be appointed as the Kazi of the area and that the 3^rd respondent was functioning as the Kazi.

A reading of Ext.P1 shows that the Government received a considerable number of representations expressing their desire to appoint the 2^nd respondent as the Kazi and after examining the various representations received from the Principal Mohammedan residents of the locality and being

WP(C) NO. 14010 OF 2019

4

2025:KER:27989

satisfied appointed as the 2^nd respondent as Kazi in exercise of the powers under Section 2 of the Kazis Act, 1880 (for short the Act). The petitioner had also filed O.S No.77 of 2019 before the Munsiff Court, Parappanangadi, as seen from Ext.P2 plaint, seeking an injunction restraining the defendants from appointing any person as Kazi in the Tirurangadi or Chemmad Mahal unless the people in the said area agreed.

A statement is filed on behalf of the 1^st respondent stating that in view of Section 2 of the Act, power is vested with the Government to appoint the Kazis and if any question arises whether any person has been rightly appointed as Kazi under this Section, the decision thereof of the State Government shall be conclusive. It also enables the Government to appoint more than one Kazi for a particular area. It is also stated that there is no procedure stated in the Act for making an appointment as Kazi. True, there is no procedure as such prescribed under Section 2, and no grounds are pointed out as such to find Ext.P1 appointment as illegal. No interim order was passed by this Court, and the 2^nd respondent has been functioning since Ext.P1. Under such circumstances, the only option available to the

WP(C) NO. 14010 OF 2019

5

2025:KER:27989

petitioner is to move the Government, if so advised, for removing the 2^nd respondent on the grounds mentioned under Section 2, if the same is made out. I do not find any merit in this writ petition

and the same is dismissed without prejudice to any of the contentions of the petitioner in the suit filed by him and referred to above.

Sd/MOHAMMED NIAS C.P. JUDGE

Anu

WP(C) NO. 14010 OF 2019 6

2025:KER:27989

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14010/2019

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 06.03.2019 APPOINTING 2ND RESPONDENT AS KAZI EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.77/2019 ON THE FILE OF TH COURT OF THE MUNSIFF OF PARAPPANGADI DATED 20.3.2019