Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Voruganti Suribabu vs The State Of Ap on 20 February, 2024
Author: Ninala Jayasurya
Bench: Ninala Jayasurya
APHC010079052024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
[ 3209 ]
TUESDAY ,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
WRIT PETITION NO: 4416 OF 2024
Between:
1. VORUGANTI SURIBABU, S/o Subbarao, Aged 59 years, R/o D.No. 10-522,10
Eswar Nagar, Sattamatalli Street, Ramanayapeta, Kakinada Rural, Kakinada.
2. Ketha Srinivasa Rao,, S/o Ramulu, aged 48 years, R/o D.No. 10-517/2,
10 517/2, Eswar
Nagar, Sattamatalli Street, Ramanayapeta, Kakinada Rural, Kakinada.
3. Medabalimi Appa Rao,, S/o Kasulayya, aged 67 years, R/o D.No. 10-505/1,
10
Eswar Nagar, Sattamatalli Street, Ramanay
Ramanayapeta,
apeta, Kakinada Rural, Kakinada.
4. B.V.V.Kumar,, S/o late Bhaskara Rao, Aged 56 Years, R/o D.No. 10-519/1,
10
Eswar Nagar, Sattamatalli Street, Ramanayapeta, Kakinada Rural, Kakinada.
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. THE STATE OF AP, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Panch
Panchayat
ayat Raj Rural
Development Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District.
2. The Commissioner, Panchayat Raj Department, State of Andhra Pradesh,
Vijayawada.
3. The District Collector, Kakinada District. Kakinada.
4. The District Panchayat Officer, Kakinada District. Kakinada.
5. The Superintendent of Police, Kakinada District. Kakinada.
6. The Sub Inspector of Police, Sarpavaram Police Station, Kakinada, Kakinada
District.
7. The Gram Panchayat, Rep. by its Secretary, Ramanayapeta Village,
Kakinada Rural Mandal,
ndal, Kakinada District.
8. The Kakinada Urban Development Authority KUDA, Rep. by its
Commissioner, Office at NFCL Road, Kakinada.
9. D William, S/o, aged unknown. Pastor, Parisudda Devudi Mandiram, R/o
Eshwar Nagar, Ramanayapeta village, Kakinada Rural Mandal, Kakinada
District.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 3 rd respondent/District Collector in issuing proceedings vide e-file.No. 315801/2020- A3, dated 12/01/2024 permitting the running of religious place of public worship in a residential locality in a extent of 262.53 sq.yds in D.No. 10-500, Eeswar Nagar, Ramanayyapeta Village, Kakinada Rural Mandal, Kakinada District as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently set aside the proceedings of the 3rd respondent/District Collector vide e-file.No. 315801/2020-A3, dated 12/01/2024 by making it clear that, the 3rd respondent/District Collector shall not issue permission for running a church, in residential locality when the local population is protesting and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to suspend the proceedings of the 3 rd respondent/District Collector vide e-file.No. 315801/2020-A3, dated 12/01/2024 consequently directing the respondents to restrain the activities/construction of the building in D.No. 10-500, Eeswar Nagar, Ramanayyapeta Village, Kakinada Rural Mandal, Kakinada District and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRI. PONNADA SREE VYAS Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV (AP) The Court made the following:
Heard Mr.K.S.Murthy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners.
Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue representing the respondent No.3 seeks time to secure written instructions.
Mr.N.Srihari, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the respondent No.7.
Mr.K.Srinivasula Reddy, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the respondent No.8.
Learned Senior Counsel, inter alia submits that the impugned proceedings have been issued without considering the objections of the petitioners in proper perspective. Drawing the attention of this Court to Ex.P.8 dated 26.5.2020, learned Senior Counsel submits that the respondent No.9 made an application for construction of a residential building, however, the permission is granted by the District Collector for Christian Community Hall/Church. He submits that though Grama Sabha should have been conducted calling for the objections, no such procedure has been followed and simply on the basis of a Police report and the assurance stated to have been given by the respondent No.9, the proceedings impugned have been issued.
Considering the said submissions and as this Court is prima facie satisfied that the proceedings impugned are not tenable, there shall be interim suspension as prayed for.
W.P. No.4416 of 2024
Issue notice to respondent No.8.
Learned counsel for the petitioners is permitted to take out personal notice on respondent No.8 by registered post with acknowledgement due and file proof of service in the Registry, by the date of next adjournment.
List the matter on 12.3.2024.
_______ NJS, J vasu