METHEW NARIVELY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed seeking to quash Ext. P3 and a declaration that Section 4(1) and 4(3) of the Kerala Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1968, (here-in-after referred to as 'the Act') is unconstitutional and void, being ultra vires of Article 14, 25 and 26(b) of the Constitution is also sought for.

(2.) First petitioner is the Vicar of St. Augustine's Forane Church, Ramapuram and 2nd and 3rd petitioners are its Trustees. Ext. P1 is a notification issued by the first respondent, in terms of Section 4(1) of the Act, giving notice of their intention to declare St. Mary's Church, St. Augustine's Church and the two storied building in which late Thoma Kathanar was residing, to be Protected Monuments for the purpose of the Act. By this notification the first respondent invited objections, to be addressed to the Secretary to Government, Cultural Affairs (B) Department, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram. Accordingly, objections were filed and Ext. P2 is the objection filed by the first petitioners. Parties were heard by the first respondent on 17-12-2007 and by Ext. P3, the first respondent rejected the objections and directed the 3rd respondent to take further steps to declare St. Mary's Church, St. Augustine's Church and the two storied building as Protected Monuments as envisaged in the Act. It is challenging this notification and for other reliefs, that this writ petition is filed.

(3.) Contentions raised were mainly that there was no consideration as to whether the structures mentioned in Ext. P1 notification are Ancient Monuments as defined in the Act. It was also contended that none of the officials had inspected the buildings or made any report and therefore the formation of opinion which is a condition precedent for exercising the powers under Section 4 of the Act is bad. Lastly it was contended that Section 4 does not laid down any guidelines for exercising the power conferred on the first respondent and therefore Section 4 is unconstitutional. Reliance was placed on the judgments of the Apex Court in Barium Chemicals Ltd. and Anr. v. Company Law Board and Ors. , Air India v. Nergesh Meerza and Ors. and District Registrar & Collector Hyderabad and Anr. v. Canara Bank and Ors. .