On April 7, 2025, the Kerala High Court issued an interim stay on a recent single judge's decision that had cancelled the appointment of a State-appointed Inquiry Commission. This commission was originally set up to find a long-term solution for the ongoing land ownership conflict between the residents of Munambam and the Waqf Board.
The division bench, comprising Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice S. Manu, issued the interim order while considering the State Government’s appeal against the earlier verdict dated March 17, 2025. That earlier verdict had nullified the appointment of the commission.
"During the pendency of these appeals, operation and implementation of the judgment dated 17th March 2025 is stayed. The Report submitted by the Commission constituted under the Exhibit P1 notification in accordance with the terms of reference will not be acted upon by the State Government without seeking leave of this Court in these appeals,"
— Division Bench, Kerala High Court
The court further instructed the State Government not to act upon the report submitted by the commission without prior permission from the court. The next hearing in this matter has been scheduled for June 16, 2025.
Read also: "She Stayed With You, You Must Answer": Kerala HC to Intelligence Officer in Suicide Case
A detailed written order from the court is still awaited.
In its appeal, the State Government maintained that the land in question — even if hypothetically assumed to be Waqf property — does not restrict the government’s authority to explore peaceful resolution methods. This is especially important since the dispute has triggered public protests and posed a law-and-order challenge.
"The Inquiry Commission was only set up to collect information. It does not have the authority to make any legal decisions or adjudicate on land title issues,"
— State Government submission in appeal
Read also: Kerala HC: Arbitration Challenges Must Wait for Final Award Unless Section 37 Appeal Applies
The government argued that any official decision based on the Commission’s recommendations would be taken only after due consideration. Therefore, the commission’s role is informative, not judicial.
During a prior hearing on Friday, the bench also made an oral observation about a technical question regarding the type of petition filed before the single judge. The key legal issue was whether the petition should have been filed as a Writ Petition or a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), and whether the grounds mentioned for cancelling the commission were legally valid and well-supported by precedent.
"Currently it was only concerned with whether the petition before the Single Bench should have been a Writ Petition or PIL and whether there are well-settled laws for setting aside an exercise of power of the Government like this."
Case Title: State of Kerala v T. K. I. Ahamed Sherief and Others
Case No: WA 603/ 2025
