ORDER :

This Writ Petition for a mandamus is filed to declare the inaction of respondent Nos.4 to 7 in taking action for construction of the Church which is a religious structure, without prior approval of the District Collector, as illegal and consequently prayed to pass appropriate orders as deemed fit by the Court in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, Sri M. Manohar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.5 and Smt. G. Amulya Spencer, learned counsel for unofficial respondent Nos.8 to 11.

3. As per the facts culled out from the pleadings in the Writ Petition and also from the submissions made at length by learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, learned Standing Counsel for Municipality and learned counsel for unofficial respondents, father-in-law of respondent No.8 has constructed a tiled roof building and thereafter the 8th respondent has renovated the same as per the approved plan which contains a provision for prayer hall.

4. The grievance of the writ petitioner is that for the purpose of making any religious construction like Churches, a permission from the District Collector, who is the 4th respondent herein, is essential and sin qua non for constructing a Church and without obtaining any such permission from the District Collector that the father-in-law of the 8th respondent has constructed the Church in the said house on the top of it and now the renovation process is being taken up by the said Church also in the said house.

5. The 5th respondent – Municipality has filed counter alleging that only a family prayer hall is available in the house in question, of respondent No.8 and to have a family prayer hall in the house of the 8th respondent that no permission from the District Collector is required. But it is pleaded that the Municipality found certain violations in constructing the said house now in renovating the said house and earlier a provisional notice was issued to the 8th respondent pointing out the said deviations and thereafter a final order was passed for demolition of the structures that are made illegally in deviation of the approved plan and the said process is now pending.

6. The counter of Revenue i.e., respondent No.6 is filed alleging that the site on which the present house is constructed belongs to Grama Kantam and the 8th respondent or her family members have no right to make any such construction on the said Grama Kantam and that a notice was issued to the site owner calling for the explanation for occupying the Grama Kantam and making illegal construction on the same and the said process of taking appropriate action is pending in this regard.

7. Unofficial respondent No.8 filed counter alleging that the house in question was constructed long back by the father-inlaw of the 8th respondent after obtaining prior approval from the Municipality and the plan that was approved consists of a prayer hall and the same was constructed as per the approved plan and it does not require any permission from the District Collector as alleged by the petitioner. It is further pleaded that the 8th respondent has now taken up the process of renovating the said house after obtaining necessary approval from the Municipality and the renovation of the house is being carried on strictly as per the approval given by the Municipality and there are no deviations.

8. As can be seen from the case pleaded by the writ petitioner, the Writ Petition is founded on the ground that a Church was constructed by the unofficial respondents, which is a religious construction and as per G.O.Ms.No.376, dated 29.11.2012 that a prior approval of the District Collector is required for construction of the said Church and as the said Church was constructed without any such prior approval from the District Collector, the said construction is illegal. Therefore, he sought for a declaration regar