Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Lazarus Lunjala vs Most Rev Dr K Fredrick Paradesi Babu on 3 April, 2025
Author: Ninala Jayasurya
Bench: Ninala Jayasurya
APHC010474542023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3443]
AT AMARAVATI
WRIT APPEAL No: 1033 of 2023 along with W.A.
Nos.746, 1052, 1053 & 1163 of 2023
Writ Appeal No: 1033 of 2023
Lazarus Lunjala ...Appellant
Vs.
The Andhra Evangelical
ical Lutheran
Luther Church (AELC) and Others ...Respondent(s)
**********
Advocate for Appellant: Mr. M. R. K. Chakravarthy Advocate(s) for Respondent(s): Mr. K. G. Krishna Murthy, Senior Counsel, Mr. C. V. Mohan Reddy, Senior Counsel, a/w Mr. Vivek Chandra Sekhar S, Mr.G.. Tuhin Kumar CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA DATE : 03.04.2025 2025 per DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ :
The controversy in the present writ appeals pertains to the elections and management of the Andhra Evangelical Lutheran Church (AELC), which is a society earlier registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, 1860 and is now governed by the Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 2001.
2. The AELC Society is stated to consist of approximately 1200 churches and 300 congregations spread over various districts in the State of Andhra Pradesh. All the churches and congregations are organized into six 2 HCJ & NJS, J W.A. No.1033 of 2023 & Batch synods, namely Central Guntur Synod, East Guntur Synod, West Guntur Synod, East Godavari Synod, West Godavari Synod, and Visakha Synod. The synods are further divided into several parishes which are further classified as A, B and C according to their strength and financial capacity.
3. The affairs of the society are managed by a central body comprising the President, Vice President, General Secretary and other members, in all numbering 12. For electing the members in the central body, elections are first held at the Synod level. The elected representatives from the Synod level then participate to elect the central body.
4. Three groups have emerged with conflicting claims, each of which claims that they were rightfully elected office bearers of the central body. One group is represented by Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu, the other by Dr. C.H. Elia and the third by Dr. G. Sam Sampath Kumar.
5. It is in the aforementioned backdrop that we deem it necessary to briefly state and trace the contentions raised in the writ petitions filed before the learned single judge.
6. In Writ Petition No. 10887 of 2021 filed by Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu, the case set up by Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu was that he had earlier been elected as the President/Moderator Bishop for two terms, which election was not challenged by anybody. It was stated that his term was to end on 31.05.2021, when based upon the representation dated 21.05.2021, the District Collector of Krishna district, in proceedings, dated 21.05.2021, granted 3 HCJ & NJS, J W.A. No.1033 of 2023 & Batch permission for conduct of the 50th biennial convention and election for the post of President/Moderator Bishop and other office bearers, as per the constitution of the society, which election was to be held on 27.05.2021.
7. In the election so held, on the date fixed, Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu, claimed that he had been declared elected as the President/Moderator Bishop for a term of four years commencing from 01.06.2021 till 30.05.2025. Likewise, it was stated that the second petitioner, namely Karnapala Vijaya Prasanna Kumar was declared elected as Vice President of the society for a term of two years from 2021 to 2023.
8. The petitioners claimed that having been so elected as President and Vice President of the Central Body, when they went with other office bearers to the AELC office on 01.06.2021, respondents 4 and 5, i.e., the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Guntur, and the Circle Inspector of Police, Arundalpet, did not allow them to enter the premises without any rhyme or reason.
9. The stand of the petitioner Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu further was that he was eligible to contest for the post of President inasmuch as the upper age limit to contest for the post of President had been enhanced from 61 to 63 years as per the General Body Resolution, dated 28.05.2019, whereby Article 7(2)(a) of the Constitution of AELC had been amended providing for enhancement of the age from 61 to 63 years.
4
HCJ & NJS, J W.A. No.1033 of 2023 & Batch
10. In that backdrop, the petitioner Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu, claiming to be the duly elected President of the society, claimed that respondent No.6 in W.P No.10887 of 2021, namely Shri Lazarus Abraham, who the petitioner alleged was a person against whom as many as 31 criminal cases had been registered within the jurisdiction of Hubli and Dharwad districts against whom a rowdy sheet had been opened by the Hubli and Dharwad police authorities and against whom there was an externment proceeding issued by the police commissioner of Dharwad, had somehow managed the police authorities to prevent the petitioner from entering the AELC office by deploying police force in front of the residence of the petitioner and thus preventing the petitioner from performing the day to day affairs of the AELC. It was in those circumstances that the petitioner Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the official respondents, i.e., the police authorities, not to interfere with the day to day affairs of the AELC.
11. It appears from the record that the petitioner Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu had also filed writ petition No.4781 of 2021 in which the petitioner had questioned the action of locking of the office of the AELC by the police authorities.
12. In writ petition No.4781 of 2021, Dr. Elia came to be impleaded as a party respondent. The stand of Dr. Elia in the said petition was that in a meeting of the AELC council and delegates conducted on 31.08.2020 calling for a special convention for expelling Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu as the Moderator 5 HCJ & NJS, J W.A. No.1033 of 2023 & Batch Bishop, the matter, it is stated, was taken up by the adjudication committee, which finally ordered the removal of Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu as the President/Moderator Bishop as he had failed to offer any explanation or appear before the said adjudication committee. The stand of Dr. Elia was that a special convention was conducted on 20/21.11.2020 in the Christu Lutheran Church at Venkatayapalem, Thulluru in Guntur district in which Dr. Elia came to be elected as Moderator Bishop of AELC.
13. The stand of Dr. Elia in the petition further was that even after having been removed as the President and even when Dr. Elia was elected as the new President, Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu continued to interfere with the affairs of AELC. The stand of Dr. Elia was that having been elected as the President/Moderator Bishop of AELC, he had taken charge of the main building of AELC and had been looking after its affairs.
14. While the matter stood thus, it appears that Dr. Elia approached the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge at Eluru through O.S. No. 55 of 2020 for permanent injunction in which an interim injunction was granted. It appears that by virtue of the order passed in I.A. No. 1 of 2021 in C.R.P. No. 35 of 2021, the order passed by the trial Court was suspended. Further, in I.A. No. 3 of 2021 in C.R.P. No. 35 of 2021, the High Court passed the following order:
"In view of the suspension order passed by this court in I.A. No.02 of 2021, the Superintendent of Police, Guntur Urban, DSP West and Station House Officer, Arundalpet Police Station Guntur are directed not to allow the respondent to enter into the AELC office, Becker compound, large center, Brodipet, Guntur, pending disposal of the CRP."6
HCJ & NJS, J W.A. No.1033 of 2023 & Batch
15. In the backdrop of the aforementioned facts a single Judge of this Court while disposing of writ petition No. 4781 of 2021 held that the issue whether Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu continued as a Moderator Bishop or not and whether Dr. Elia was the Moderator Bishop of the society was a dispute which could not be resolved in writ proceedings. The writ petition was accordingly disposed of leaving the parties to avail the remedies in accordance with law. However, the Interim directions issued in I.A. No. 3 of 2021 in C.R.P. No. 35 of 2021 were directed to remain in operation. The Court directed that Dr. Elia be not permitted to enter the office of the society till such time as the orders in I.A. No. 3 of 2021 in C.R.P. No. 35 of 2021, dated 15.01.2021, were in subsistence.
16. Subsequently, however, C.R.P. No. 35 of 2021 was dismissed as having been rendered infructuous on account of the fact that the suit filed by Dr. Elia had been withdrawn in the lower Court.
17. Another writ petition No.10891 of 2021 came to be filed by the Andhra Evangelical Lutheran Church represented by its Secretary Chinnam Kishore Babu and Moses Arnold Kollabathula, who claimed to be the Treasurer of AELC. In W.P. No. 10891 of 2021, the reliefs sought were similar in nature as were prayed for by Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu in writ petition No. 10887 of 2021.
7
HCJ & NJS, J W.A. No.1033 of 2023 & Batch
18. By virtue of interim orders, dated 03.06.2021, passed in W.P. Nos. 10887 and 10891 of 2021, filed by Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu and Chinnam Kishore, directions were issued to the police authorities not to interfere with the conduct of day-to-day administration of the petitioner Society from its premises by the new managing committee under the guise of maintaining law and order.
19. It is pertinent to note that no specific direction was issued against Shri Lazarus Abraham, who figured as respondent No.5 in W.P. No. 10891 of 2021 and as respondent no.6 in W.P. No. 10887 of 2021.
20. Writ appeals were preferred against the said order by Shri Lazarus Abraham being W.A Nos. 341 and 355 of 2021. However, the division Bench by its order, dated 17.09.2021, declined to entertain the challenge but left it open to the appellant to move the single Judge for vacation of the interim orders.
21. A contempt case bearing No.1012 of 2021 came to be filed alleging breach of the order, dated 03.06.2021, in which the High Court, on 17.02.2022, issued Form-I notice. The said proceedings were challenged before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ordered that the contempt proceedings be deferred by the learned single Judge till such time as orders were passed in the application filed for vacation of the interim order.
22. While the Supreme Court had ordered the learned single Judge to defer the contempt proceedings by virtue of its order passed on 29.03.2022, 8 HCJ & NJS, J W.A. No.1033 of 2023 & Batch the learned single Judge had already passed yet another order in C.C. No.1012 of 2021, on 28.03.2022, directing the police authorities to provide police aid to the petitioners with a view to enable them to function from the church premises and to carry out day to day administration of the society from the church premises.
23. The police authorities were also given liberty to take appropriate action against the fourth respondent in the said contempt petition, i.e., Shri Lazarus Abraham, in case he created any 'law and order' problem in the church premises. In addition to this, an Advocate was also appointed as a Commissioner to oversee the day-to-day administrative activities of the society in the church premises, who is required to submit a report to the Court on a day-to-day basis.
24. LPA(SR) No. 12628 of 2022 is stated to have been filed against the said order, dated 28.03.2022, which was subsequently closed vide order, dated 13.12.2024.
25. Pursuant to the orders passed by the learned single Judge exercising contempt jurisdiction, it appears that the Advocate Commissioner visited the church premises, but on meeting with stiff resistance from the occupants thereof, finally made it into the church premises with the help of police force. Upon the premises being searched, the police are stated to have recovered certain arms and weapons, which according to the police personnel were stated to have been kept by Shri Lazarus Abraham. 9
HCJ & NJS, J W.A. No.1033 of 2023 & Batch
26. The Advocate Commissioner also found that the Bishop's bungalow, which was a part and parcel of the AELC, was occupied by Dr. G. Sam Sampath Kumar, the appellant in W.A. Nos.1052 and 1053 of 2023, who was asked to vacate the bungalow by the Advocate Commissioner. Finally, according to the report submitted by the Advocate Commissioner, possession of the church as also the Bishop's bungalow was taken over.
27. The stand of Shri Lazarus Abraham before the learned single Judge was that he was elected as the Treasurer of AELC in the elections conducted on 23.11.2020, and that he was the competent authority to handle the financial affairs of the AELC in accordance with the Constitution and Bylaws of the AELC.
28. The contention of Shri Lazarus Abraham further was that the elections allegedly conducted on 27.05.2021, wherein Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu claims to have been elected as President and Rev. Kanapala Vijaya Prasanna Kumar claims to have been elected as Vice President, were non-est in the eyes of law.
29. Shri Lazarus Abraham had also refuted the allegations made against him in the writ petitions that he along with his henchmen, had obstructed the petitioners from accessing the Church. He claimed that those allegations were devoid of truth and had been made to settle personal scores.
30. The stand of Dr. G. Sam Sampath Kumar was that Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu was ineligible to contest due to violating a prior injunction order 10 HCJ & NJS, J W.A. No.1033 of 2023 & Batch passed in I.A. 167/2020 in O.S. No.4/2020 in Senior Civil Judge's Court, Mangalgiri, as also due to the fact that he did not any longer fulfill the age criteria. Dr. G. Sam Sampath Kumar further claimed that the District Registrar cum Registrar of Societies had filed an affidavit in W.A. Nos. 341 and 355 of 2021 stating that the request received from Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu for the registration of the society was rejected and that the request was not compliant with the proforma stipulated in Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 2001.
The stand of Dr. G. Sam Sampath Kumar further was that Dr. C.H. Elia was 69 years old and therefore ineligible for the post of President/Moderator Bishop, and that Dr. Elia had submitted his resignation on 05.01.2022, which was accepted by the council on 06.01.2022 in its resolution, which resolution is stated to have been submitted to the District Registrar, Guntur.
31. In the backdrop of the aforementioned alleged ineligibilities and resignation, the stand of Dr. G. Sam Sampath Kumar was that a subsequent election was conducted on 07.03.2022, following police aid sought via W.P. No. 5835 of 2022 filed by his Secretary, M. Mary Grace and further that he received the highest votes and was declared Moderator Bishop in the election held in March 2022 and that his elected body was running the society's activities smoothly.
32. Regarding the events detailed in preceding paragraphs involving the Advocate Commissioner, the stand of Dr. G. Sam Sampath Kumar was that 11 HCJ & NJS, J W.A. No.1033 of 2023 & Batch he was the Moderator Bishop residing in the Bishop's bungalow and discharging his duties at the time and that the Advocate Commissioner, along with police officials and the writ petitioners (Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu's group), forcibly vacated the premises, broke open the AELC Main Office lock, keys to which were allegedly with his members, and illegally handed over possession to Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu's group. The stand of Dr. G. Sam Sampath Kumar further was that his group had filed W.P. 30325 of 2022 seeking permission to discharge their duties from the AELC office, asserting that Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu was occupying the premises as a "trespasser" based on court orders obtained without impleading the necessary parties.
33. Writ petitions Nos.10887 and 10891 of 2021 finally came up for consideration before a single Bench of this Court.
34. The Court declined to go into the question as to who was lawfully elected to the offices of the society and left the issue to be resolved in the original petitions which were pending before the district Courts at Guntur.
However, considering the fact that the society was nothing but a body which was managing religious institutions, while exercising its parens patriae jurisdiction, the learned single Judge, did not proceed to dismiss the writ petition and instead chose to issue directions inter alia, permitting the society to be managed by the group represented by Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu, along with the Advocate Commissioner, appointed to oversee the functioning and the affairs of the society.
12
HCJ & NJS, J W.A. No.1033 of 2023 & Batch The said management, however, was prohibited from taking any policy decisions in relation to the affairs of the society or the colleges run by it. The district Courts at Guntur were also directed to consider and dispose of the original petitions and interim applications which were pending before it. It was also ordered that if the civil suits were not disposed of before the expiry of the term claimed by Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu, it would be open to any of the parties to those petitions to move the Court for making alternate arrangements regarding the management of the society, till the disposal of the petitions.
35. Be that as it may, the options open to the learned single Judge while deciding writ petition Nos.10887 and 10891 of 2021 were firstly to simply dismiss the petitions with liberty to the parties to approach the appropriate forum, secondly to determine as to who were the duly elected representatives of the society, or thirdly to put that group again in charge of the management of the society who were running the affairs of the society before the passing of the order, dated 28.06.2022, in C.C. No.1012 of 2021.
36. The learned single Judge, however, chose to relegate the parties to work out the remedies, and pending such a resolution, ordered continuance of the committee as was already in place. This was done keeping in view the fact that during the course of the management of the existing committee, there were not too many incidents of violence or disruption in the affairs of the society. And further that, in case a new team was installed to run the affairs of the society, it might lead to disruption of the working of the society. 13
HCJ & NJS, J W.A. No.1033 of 2023 & Batch
37. The present set of appeals have been filed questioning the common judgment and order passed in the aforementioned two writ petitions. It is not disputed that the Original Petitions filed before the District Court have not been decided finally, as per the directions that had been issued by the learned single Judge. In the meantime, the tenure of the office bearers is also stated to be coming to an end in the month of April/May, whereafter, the elections are to be held for electing a new body.
38. It is reported that each of the groups before this Court are either planning or have already initiated measures to conduct the elections, which in our opinion, will lead to more confusion and chaos, and shall also lead to litigation, which will have a cascading effect. Ultimately, the fight that may ensue, will affect the educational, spiritual and religious interest of lakhs of followers, whose interest the society is otherwise entrusted to protect.
39. While one could have questioned the legality of the orders passed by the learned single Judge in the earlier round of litigation in issuing orders while exercising contempt jurisdiction, yet, the fact remains that the said orders continued to remain in force, based upon which the group headed by Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu, with the help of police force, entered the office premises of the AELC, even when certain factual situations remained unexplained.
40. It remained unexplained as to how Dr. G. Sam Sampath Kumar was found to be in possession of the bungalow of the Moderator Bishop, when 14 HCJ & NJS, J W.A. No.1033 of 2023 & Batch there appeared to be no averment made in the petition filed by Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu, or anybody belonging to his group, that they had been evicted from the residential premises in question, more so, when Dr. K.F. Paradesi Babu claimed that he had been continuing as Moderator Bishop for the earlier two tenures, this being his third tenure, commencing from 2021. In this regard, the factum of occupation of the residence of the Moderator Bishop by Dr. G. Sam Sampath Kumar is clearly reflected from the report filed by the Advocate Commissioner, dated 01.04.2022.
41. The entire purpose of enumerating the history of disputes in the preceding paragraphs is with a view to show the conflicting claims between various groups, centered around the process of election to the central body of the society.
42. We have now been informed that the elections next are due in the month of April/May, and considering the fact that each of the parties who find a mention in the preceding paragraphs now seek to initiate the process of elections on their own, which would lead to further confusion and chaos, any decision on the correctness or otherwise of the judgment and order impugned on merits, in our opinion, would certainly not put an end to the present controversy considering the history of litigation between them.
43. In those circumstances, with a view to resolve the issue, it was suggested to the counsel for the parties to agree on the appointment of a retired Judge to ensure the orderly conduct of the elections to the synods and 15 HCJ & NJS, J W.A. No.1033 of 2023 & Batch to the central body, as also to manage the affairs of the society until such process is completed and the new office bearers are put in place.
44. Although there was some reluctance initially shown by Mr. G. Tuhin Kumar, learned counsel for Dr. Elia, finally all the learned counsel appearing for the parties agree to the arrangement as suggested.
45. Be that as it may, with the agreement of the counsel for the parties the present set of appeals is disposed of in the following terms. a. The entire process of elections starting from the synod level as also the elections to the central body of the AELC shall be conducted under the instructions, directions, supervision and guidance of Justice Kurian Joseph, former judge, Supreme Court of India, who shall function as the 'Controller'.
b. Till such time as the elections are so conducted in accordance with the constitution and the bye-laws of AELC, as also the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 2001, and till such time as the new management is in place, the day-to-day affairs of the society shall also be conducted as per the instructions and directions of the 'Controller', who may, if necessary, appoint an administrator on such terms as he deems appropriate and reasonable, to run the day-to-day affairs of the society as also to assist the 'Controller' in the smooth conduct of the elections.
16
HCJ & NJS, J W.A. No.1033 of 2023 & Batch c. The 'Controller' shall be entitled to draw an amount of Rs.15 lakhs per month as honorarium in addition to the expenses incurred by him on travel, boarding, lodging and other connected expenses, which shall be paid from the funds of the society.
d. The State authorities, the police authorities as also the district administrations shall render such assistance to the 'Controller', or on his instructions to the administrator, for ensuring smooth conduct of the elections as also for ensuring that there is no interference in running the affairs of the society in the interregnum.
e. The present management including the Advocate Commissioner would discharge their functions only till such time as the 'Controller' formally takes over the affairs of the society, whereafter they shall cease to exercise such control.
The writ appeals are, accordingly, disposed of. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ NINALA JAYASURYA, J akn 17 HCJ & NJS, J W.A. No.1033 of 2023 & Batch HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Writ Appeal Nos:1033 of 2023 along with W.A. Nos.746, 1052, 1053 & 1163 of 2023 DATE :03.04.2025 AKN