Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
A Arogya Dass vs The State Of Ap on 2 December, 2020
Author: U. Durga Prasad Rao
Bench: U. Durga Prasad Rao
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO
Writ Petition No.22085 of 2020
ORDER:
The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 7 in not preventing the respondents 8 & 9 from conducting Special Diocesan Council on 03.12.2020 which is scheduled to be held at Arogyavaram Medical Centre, Arogyavaram, Chittoor District contrary to COVID-19 guidelines dated 04.06.2020 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, New Delhi as arbitrary, illegal and against the Articles 19 & 21 of the Constitution of India and consequentially direct the respondents 3 to 7 to take necessary action against the respondents 8 & 9 for disobeying the proceedings in Lr.No.202/B/CSI CENTRAL CHURCH/2020 dated 20.10.2020 and to pass such other order as deemed fit in the circumstances of the case.
2. The petitioner's case succinctly is thus:
(a) The petitioner is the member of CSI Central church, Kadapa and is an advocate by profession. The CSI Rayalaseema Diocese was formed on 17.07.1950 as per the decision of the Church of South India held in January, 1950 amalgamating the Ananthapuram, Kurnool, Kadapa and Chittoor Dioceses as Rayalaseema Diocese and functioning as such having headquarters at Kadapa. While so, the Bishop of CSI RD Rt. Rev. B.D. Prasad Rao retired on 13.08.2019 on attaining superannuation. The 8th respondent, who is the head of CSI 2 Synod, is personally acting as caretaker of Church administration of CSI Rayalaseema Diocese with the assistance of Pastors as in-charges.
The 9th respondent issued election schedule on 15.10.2020 as per extension of time frame mandate given by 8th respondent fixing the date of meeting of the Special Diocesan Council on 03.12.2020 at Arogyavaram Medical Centre, Arogyavaram, Chittoor District. The proposed meeting is contrary to the proceedings in Lr.No.202/B/CSI CENTRAL CHURCH/2020 dated 20.10.2020 wherein a report was submitted by the District Minorities Welfare Officer, YSR Kadapa to 4th respondent and marked copies to other respondents by bringing to their knowledge that COVID-19 was spreading rapidly in the country including the State of Andhra Pradesh and advised not to hold the said elections on 03.12.2020 at the said Arogyavaram Medical Centre. Despite the said communication made by the District Minorities Welfare Officer, the respondents 8 & 9 are proceeding with the election. The 9th respondent failed to get any permission from the government authorities in view of the prevailing pandemic situation. It is further contended that the Lay Sub-Committee which organizes and holds the said election, consists of five members panel, out of whom, four members are in the age group of 68 to 75 years. The voters consist of CSI RD scattered in four Districts i.e., Chittoor, Kadapa, Ananthapur & Kurnool, of which 20% of voters are above 60 years of age and they are senior citizens and they have to travel 150 to 300 kilometers to attend the election at Arogyavaram Medical Centre. In these circumstances, the holding of election is highly risky and 3 hazardous, however, the respondents 8 & 9 are proceeding with the elections nonchalantly.
Hence, the writ petition.
3. Heard Sri Thummalapudi Sridhar, learned counsel for petitioner, and learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare representing the respondents 1 & 3, learned Government Pleader for Home representing 2nd respondent, Sri Shaik Sultana, Standing Counsel for 4th respondent, learned Government Pleader for Revenue representing the respondents 5 to 7, and Sri Ramanna Dora K.B. representing 9th respondent.
4. Sri Ravi Cheemalapati, counsel representing the learned counsel for petitioner, while reiterating the writ petition averments, would strongly and mainly profess that in the prevailing COVID-19 situation which is continuing in the State of Andhra Pradesh, particularly in the areas of Rayalaseema and Chittoor, it is neither advisable nor conducive to conduct elections, but the respondents 8 & 9 are not considering this aspect with due seriousness. He would point out that even the election holders themselves are aged more than 70 years and the persons who come to caste their vote are also aged more than 60 years. Besides, they have to come from the nook and corner of Rayalaseema to attend at Arogyavaram Medical Centre, which is a risky journey for them in the present situation. So, holding of election is not advisable. He further submitted that the District Minorities Welfare Officer in his letter dated 20.10.2020, also 4 expressed a similar apprehension with regard to the prevalence of COVID-19 and opined that in the interest of public health and to contain the spread of corona pandemic, the Chairman Lay Sub- Committee and members may not hold the Bishopric elections in CSI RD as proposed on 03.12.2020 or any other date till such time the pandemic menace is overcome. He also advised them to obtain permission from the concerned District Collector before holding the Bishopric Panel elections in the CSI RD. Learned counsel would submit that without obtaining permission from the Collector as pointed out by the District Minorities Welfare Officer, the respondents 8 & 9, in post haste manner, are proceeding with the election. He thus prayed to allow the writ petition.
5. Sri Nagaraju Naguru, counsel also appearing for the petitioner reinforced the above arguments.
6. While so, learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare would submit that the affairs of holding the elections is depending upon the constitution and byelaws of CSI Central Church and as such it is an internal affair of the concerned Church and its members, over which the Government cannot have any say with regard to the holding of elections. He, however, added that while holding elections, for providing necessary security and making other arrangements, the election authorities may request the concerned public authorities like the Collector and Police Department if needed. Except that the 5 Government have no direct involvement in the matter of holding of elections.
7. Learned counsel Sri K.B.Ramanna Dora representing 9th respondent strongly opposed the writ petition firstly on the main plank of argument that the petitioner is neither a voter nor a contestant in the forthcoming Bishopric Panel elections of Rayalaseema Diocese and therefore, he has no locus to file the writ petition to stop the proposed elections. On this ground, learned counsel sought to dismiss the writ petition in limini. He would further submit that there is no special or general order passed by the Government authorities directing the 9th respondent to withhold the elections. Referring to the arguments of the learned Government Pleader, he would submit that in view of the special and separate constitution of the Church, the Government is not concerned with the election of the Church. Learned counsel further argued that the apprehension expressed by the petitioner with regard to COVID-19 is baseless because the Chairperson of CSI Rayalaseema Diocese has taken all the precautions needed to conduct the elections. He directed that the members shall strictly follow the guidelines given by the Government in view of the COVID-19 crisis i.e., wearing masks, maintaining social distance and sanitization mandatorily. He further directed that all the members should invariably get COVID tests done within 14 days prior to the meeting of the council and present the report at the time of registration. Emphasizing these precautions, learned counsel would emphatically 6 argue that the voters who produce COVID negative certificate alone will be permitted to attend the election and caste their votes and others will not be permitted. He would further submit that at any rate not more than 350 to 400 persons will attend the impending elections and in view of all the precautions are going to be meticulously observed, the apprehension expressed by the petitioner is untenable. He thus prayed to dismiss the writ petition.
8. The point for consideration is whether there are merits in the writ petition to allow?
9. Point: The first and preliminary objection raised by the learned counsel for 9th respondent is that the petitioner is only a member of the CSI Central Church, but he is neither a contestant nor a voter in the forthcoming election and hence, he has no locus to file the writ petition. In the arguments of the learned counsel for petitioner, he admitted that the petitioner is a Member, but not a contestant or a voter. However, his argument pivots around the prevalence of COVID-19 and its impact on elections. Therefore, the main question is whether the petitioner, who being only a Member of the CSI church but not a contestant or voter, can maintain this writ petition, particularly to stall the forthcoming elections. The petitioner has not produced before this Court any provision from the constitution of the church empowering a Member as such but not a voter or contestant to question and challenge the process of election and seek to stall the same. Therefore, it can only be held that at the first instance the 7 petitioner is not competent to file this writ petition as he has no locus as such.
10. In that view, though other aspects are wholly irrelevant, however, the argument of the petitioner regarding prevalence of COVID-19 requires a mention. In this regard, the instructions dated 15.10.2020 issued by the Chairperson, Lay Sub-Committee, Bishop Election, CSI Rayalaseema Diocese, which were addressed to all the Members of the Special Diocesan Council, would show that all the Members were clearly instructed that they should strictly follow the guidelines given by the Government in view of the COVID-19 crisis by wearing masks, maintaining social distance and sanitize invariably. It was further directed that all the Members should get COVID test done within 14 days of the meeting of the Council and present the report at the time of registration. Therefore, sufficient amount of care has been taken by the concerned authorities to face the COVID situation and to hold the election. As rightly pointed out by Sri K.B.Ramanna Dora, no specific interdictory or restrictive order passed by any competent authority of the Government is placed before this Court. On the other hand, going by the submission of the learned Government Pleader, the Government is not concerned directly with the holding of elections of the CSI Central Church because of its autonomous status and independent constitution and rules and regulations.
8
11. In these circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that this writ petition deserves dismissal for want of locus on the part of the petitioner as well as devoid of merits and accordingly dismissed. No costs.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any, pending for consideration shall stand closed.
__________________________ U. DURGA PRASAD RAO, J 02.12.2020 Note: Issue C.C. by 03.12.2020 (B/o) MVA