Judgment : 1. The petitioners seek a writ of mandamus directing the police to investigate and take necessary action to prevent the act of excommunication done by the respondents 5 to 7 and to direct the first respondent to monitor the process of investigation, besides provide them police protection for their peaceful living in the locality. The Facts: 2. The petitioners are residents of Keelasirupothu Village in the District of Ramanathapuram and they are the members of Keelasirupothu Muslim Sunnath Jamath Pallivaasal. The second petitioner was the President of the Jamath for a period of 23 years. 3. While the matters stood thus, the respondents 5 to 7 and their supporters excommunicated the petitioners and this resulted in constructing a trust building by them for the purpose of offering prayers. The respondents 5 to 7 demanded transfer of property of the second petitioner without offering sale consideration by arranging Kattapanchayat and stating that they have detected certain malpractices committed by him while he was administering the Jamath. The local Sub-Inspector of Police was also instrumental in achieving this purpose by the respondents 5 to 7. 4. The petitioners were prevented from entering the mosque and the respondents 5 to 7 warned others living in the Village against moving with the petitioners. In short, the petitioners were excommunicated and they were not permitted to live in the village which made them to shift their residence temporarily. Though several complaints were preferred before the Police, there was no follow up action and the same resulted in filing a petition before this Court in Crl. O.P. (MD) No. 9179 of 2008, praying for a direction to take action against the respondents 5 to 7. This Court as per order dated 14.9.2009 directed the second respondent to take appropriate action on the basis of the complaint preferred by the petitioners on 8.7.2009. Accordingly, the Police registered a case in Crime No. 8 of 2010 on the file of the Illanjempur Police Station. However, FIR was kept in cold, storage and no further action was taken to proceed against respondents 5 to 7. This made the petitioners to file the writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus for issuance of appropriate direction to the police. 5. The Sub Inspector of Police, Illanjembur Police Station/fourth respondent herein filed a counter in answer to the contentions raised in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. This made the petitioners to file the writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus for issuance of appropriate direction to the police. 5. The Sub Inspector of Police, Illanjembur Police Station/fourth respondent herein filed a counter in answer to the contentions raised in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. According to the fourth respondent, the second petitioner was the President of the Jamath for more than 23 years and he was alleged to have involved in misappropriation of Jamath funds and as such, he was constrained to resign from the office and this only resulted in filing complaints against the other members of the Jamath. The case registered on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioners was investigated and found that it was a false case and as such a report was submitted before the Judicial Magistrate on 5.10.2010. The fourth respondent further contended that the allegation of excommunication was an afterthought and it was made only to circumvent the allegation of misappropriation and falsification of Jamath funds and accounts and to escape from the clutches of law. Submissions: 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners were excommunicated from the village and the same is evident from the report submitted by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District to the District Superintendent of Police with reference to the proceedings dated 29.8.2006. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner ‘ s were put to difficulties at the instance of respondents 5 to 7 and their henchmen and they were subjected to excommunication. Therefore, the learned counsel prayed for an order to take action against the respondents 5 to 7 and a direction to the police to give protection to the petitioners and their family members so as to enable them to live peacefully in the village. 7. The learned Government Pleader reiterated the contentions made in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the fourth respondent. 8. The respondents 5 to 7, though received notice, failed to appear before this Court. Therefore, there is nothing, on record to show that the allegations leveled against them by the petitioners were with ulterior motives. Discussion and Conclusion: 9. The report submitted by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District to the District Superintendent of Police with reference to the proceedings dated 29.8.2006 gives a clear idea that the petitioners were subjected to excommunication. Therefore, there is nothing, on record to show that the allegations leveled against them by the petitioners were with ulterior motives. Discussion and Conclusion: 9. The report submitted by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District to the District Superintendent of Police with reference to the proceedings dated 29.8.2006 gives a clear idea that the petitioners were subjected to excommunication. The report contains details with regard to the alleged misappropriation and the subsequent settlement of the matter between the parties. While concluding the report, the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Ramanathapuram District observed that the petitioners were excommunicated by the new office bearers of the Jamath and as such, orders have to be passed to take action against those who were responsible for such excommunication. The report contains the names of the respondents 5 to 7 as the persons responsible for such excommunication. 10. The report submitted by the Deputy Superintendent of Police has to be treated as an authentic version and in case, the said report is considered, it would reveal that the petitioners were subjected to excommunication and a decision was taken by the respondents 5 to 7 to restrain them from participating in the religious functions or to attend the prayers in the Jamath. 11. The issue regarding issuance of unlawful decrees to excommunication at the instance of the Kattapanchayatdars came up for consideration before the Division Bench, of this Court in K. Gopal v. State of Tamil Nadu and Others (2005) 3 MLJ 456 : 2005 (3) Law Weekly 298. The Division Bench very strongly condemned the alarming phenomenon which has arisen in the State of Tamil Nadu relating to mushroom growth of illegal and extra-al institutions called Kattapanchayats and passing unlawful decrees of excommunication by such Kattapanchayatdars. The following observations of the Division Bench would, make the position clear at p. 465 of MLJ: “ 27. In the opinion, Kattapanchayatdars are nothing but mafia and hooligans and kattapanchayat is simply taking the law into one ‘ s own hands by some goondas, who unlawfully claim to represent the village. 28. The following observations of the Division Bench would, make the position clear at p. 465 of MLJ: “ 27. In the opinion, Kattapanchayatdars are nothing but mafia and hooligans and kattapanchayat is simply taking the law into one ‘ s own hands by some goondas, who unlawfully claim to represent the village. 28. It may be mentioned that if one wishes to be a leader in the village or urban area, he can, contest the elections to the Panchayat or Municipality or other local body constituted by the statute, but one cannot commit illegal acts like imposition of fine, excommunication, disconnecting water and electricity supply, threats or acts of violence etc. All these are criminal offences under various provisions of the IPC and other statutes. 29. In our opinion, Kattapanchayats could not flourish in the first place without the collusion of the police and other authorities, or by their turning a blind eye to these unlawful activities. If such unlawful, extra al activities are not put down with an iron hand, there will gradually be a collapse of law and order and democracy in the State. Hence, we direct all the state authorities to take strong action in accordance with law to put down these unlawful, hooligan activities which have mushroomed in several areas of the State of Tamil Nadu and institute criminal prosecution against those who are involved. The Chief Secretary, Home Secretary and Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu are directed to ensure strict compliance of this order. They are also directed to take strong disciplinary action against the administrative and police officials who collude with the kattapanchayatdars or turn a Nelson‘s eye to their illegalities and who do hot register and prosecute criminal cases against these hooligans. The Chief Secretary will circulate copy of this judgment to all District Magistrates and Superintendent of Police in the State with a letter warning all officials, that those who do not comply with the directions in this judgment will be severally dealt with. ” 12. Since the Deputy Superintendent of Police has referred to the act of excommunication of the petitioners and recommended action against respondents 5 to 7 and others, who were responsible for such barbaric acts, there is no further proof necessary to arrive at a conclusion that the version given by the petitioners with respect to excommunication was correct. 13. ” 12. Since the Deputy Superintendent of Police has referred to the act of excommunication of the petitioners and recommended action against respondents 5 to 7 and others, who were responsible for such barbaric acts, there is no further proof necessary to arrive at a conclusion that the version given by the petitioners with respect to excommunication was correct. 13. The Revenue Administration and the Police owes a duty to see that such things would not happen within their jurisdiction. In case, the members of the Jamath like the respondents 5 to 7 take law into their own hands and excommunicate the members of the locality like the petitioners, the responsibility is on the Revenue Officers and the Police to take appropriate action to put an end to such barbaric acts with iron hands. The acts like excommunication are not the kind of acts which could be tolerated in the present century. In case, such acts are permitted it could create lawlessness in society resulting in breach of peace. 14. Therefore, I am of the view that the respondents 2 to 4 should come to the rescue of the petitioners and their family members so as to enable them to live peacefully in the village. 15. In case, the petitioners, prefer complaint, regarding ill-treatment or excommunication or other related acts, it should be enquired into by the concerned police and appropriate action should be taken. In the event of the petitioners approaching the police apprehending threat to their lives at the instance of kattapanchayatdars, immediate action should be taken by the police to provide security and to prevent untoward incident in the area. 16. The respondents 2 to 4 must realize that it is their duty to protect the life and property of the citizens and it is not a charity. They are public servants and their endeavour should be to help the public. In case, the Police and the Revenue Administration realize that it is their duty to ensure orderly life in the society, there is no need for the people like the writ petitioners to approach the Court. 17. Before concluding, I consider it appropriate to quote the following observation of Mr. Justice V.R. KRISHNA IYER in Ratlam Municipality ‘ s case AIR 1980 SC 1622 : (1980) 4 SCC 162 : “ 24. …………...... 17. Before concluding, I consider it appropriate to quote the following observation of Mr. Justice V.R. KRISHNA IYER in Ratlam Municipality ‘ s case AIR 1980 SC 1622 : (1980) 4 SCC 162 : “ 24. …………...... The pressure of the judicial process, expensive and dilatory, is neither necessary nor desirable if responsible bodies are responsive to duties .................. ” 18. The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.