Back
2022 Supreme(AP) 165
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
R. RAGHUNANDHAN RAO, J.
Yesukristu Prathana Sahavasa Sangam – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 10821 of 2021
Decided On : 25-03-2022
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: V.S.K. Rama Rao.
Point of Law: No site shall be used for the construction of a building intended for public worship or religious purposes without the prior approval of the Collector of the District who may refuse such approval if, in his opinion, the use of the site for the proposed construction of the building is likely to endanger public peace and order, after giving an opportunity to the applicant to show cause against such refusal.
Headnote:
Provisions of Building Rules - Rule 26 - Registered Sale-Deed - Charitable Organization - Petitioner No. 1 was registered on - An extent of square yards of land in R.S. Village a hamlet of West Godavari District was acquired by way of a registered Sale-Deed - Petitioner obtained Gram Panchayat permission for construction of a building/community hall but however due to financial constraints, a temporary shed could only be laid in said site - In year funds were obtained from District Minority Welfare Department for construction of a Prayer Hall and same were used for that purpose - As said Prayer Hall had become dilapidated a request was made to District Collector by letter for permission for construction of a Prayer Hall - At that stage 5th respondent who is Secretary of Gram Panchayat had addressed a letter stating that construction activities for Church were being taken up without obtaining permission of Collector and to stop further construction - Subsequently petitioners again approached District Collector by way of an application for permission for construction of Church said applications remained pending.
Finding of the Court:
Petitioner is relying upon deeming provision in Rule 26 to contend that construction carried out by petitioner is legal and that respondents cannot interfere in matter - In present case petitioner has not made any application for special permission under Rules issued G.O.Ms - In absence of any such application deeming provision does not arise - Secondly applicant is required to give a written intimation informing Gram Panchayat that construction is being taken up Rule 26 - No such intimation has been given by petitioner - Finally any construction carried out under Rule 26 has to be in accordance with Rules - In present case all respondents have unanimously contended that the petitioner has taken up construction of prayer hall in R.S. which is Government land and construction is not being carried out in R.S Rule 26 requires petitioner to obtain prior approval of collector to build prayer hall which is a building which is sought to be used for religious purposes - No such permission has been obtained.
Result: Writ Petition is Dismissed.
ORDER :
1. Petitioner No. 1 is said to be a Society, set up as a charitable organization, without reference to the caste, religion, etc. Petitioner No. 2 is the President and Pastor of petitioner No. 1.
2. The case of the petitioners is as follows:
(a) Petitioner No. 1 was registered on 18.06.2008. An extent of 242 square yards of land in R.S. No. 69 of Varathippa Village, a hamlet of Muthyalapalli, Mogalthuru Mandal, West Godavari District was acquired by way of a registered Sale-Deed dated 13.09.2011. The petitioner obtained Gram Panchayat permission on 08.07.2008 for construction of a building/community hall, but, however, due to financial constraints, a temporary shed could only be laid in the said site. In the year 2014, funds were obtained from District Minority Welfare Department for construction of a Prayer Hall and the same were used for that purpose. As the said Prayer Hall had become dilapidated, a request was made to the District Collector by letter dated 17.11.2020, for permission for construction of a Prayer Hall. At that stage, the 5th respondent who is the Secretary of the Gram Panchayat, had addressed a letter dated 30.11.2020, stating that construction activities for the Church were being taken up without obtaining permission of the Collector and to stop further construction. Subsequently, the petitioners again, approached the District Collector by way of an application dated 04.04.2021 for permission for construction of Church. The said applications remained pending.
(b) The Tahsildar of Mogalthuru Mandal by proceedings R.C. No. 106/2021/A, dated 12.05.2021, had informed the petitioners that they have to submit the permissions obtained from the District Minority Office and an application to the Panchayat Secretary for approval of building plans would also have to be made in accordance with G.O.Ms. No. 376 dated 29.11.2012.
(c) Rule 26 of G.O.Ms. No. 67, dated 26.02.2002 stipulates that if permissions are not granted within 30 days of application, there would be a deeming permission to take up construction. In view of the said deeming provision, the petitioners took up construction of the Prayer Hall/Church in Survey No. 69. While the said construction was going on, respondents No. 8 to 15 appear to have made some complaints against the said construction. On the basis of the said complaints, respondents No. 1 to 7 have started interfering with the construction of the Prayer Hall/Church, which is not permissible. The petitioners submit that on account of this interference, they are forced to approach this Court by way of the present writ petition.
3. The Tahsildar, Mogalthuru Mandal, who is respondent No. 3, has filed a counter affidavit. In the said counter affidavit, it is stated that the petitioners instead of constructing the Prayer Hall in R.S. No. 69, had in fact constructed the Prayer Hall in R.S. No. 192/1, which is classified as “Gramakantam.” He also submits that the said construction is in violation of G.O.Ms. No. 376, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department dated 29.11.2012, as necessary permission from the District Collector for construction of a religious building had not been obtained.
4. The 2nd Respondent District Collector, has filed a counter affidavit reiterating the contentions raised by respondent No. 3. Apart from this, the 2nd respondent has also filed proceedings No. 1836386/A2/2021, dated 02.07.2021, rejecting the application of the petitioners dated 04.04.2021, for permission to construct the said Prayer Hall/Church on four grounds:
(i) Firstly, the construction was being carried out in R.S. No. 192/1, which is Government land, instead of R.S. No. 69.
(ii) Secondly, registration of the 1st petitioner Society is irregular.
(iii) Thirdly, the Gram Panchayat has granted approval for construction of an Asbestos Roofed Community Hall building in 2008 and no permission for construction of a Church either in R.S. No. 69 or in R.S. No. 192/1 has been granted and that the District Collector is t
