Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ., NINALA JAYASURYA, J.
Lazarus Lunjala - Appellant
Vs.
The Andhra Evangelical Lutheran Church (AELC) and Others - Respondent
WRIT APPEAL No: 1033 of 2023 along with W.A. Nos.746, 1052, 1053 & 1163 of 2023
Decided On : 03-04-2025
(A) Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 2001 - Elections and management of the Andhra Evangelical Lutheran Church (AELC) - Dispute arose over conflicting claims of election to the central body of AELC - Court appointed a retired judge as 'Controller' to oversee elections and manage affairs until new office bearers are elected. (Paras 1, 43, 45)
(B) Writ Jurisdiction - The court declined to resolve the question of who was lawfully elected, emphasizing the need for orderly conduct of elections to avoid chaos and disruption in the society's functioning. (Paras 34, 42)
Facts of the case:
The AELC, consisting of approximately 1200 churches, faced internal disputes with three groups claiming rightful election to the central body. The court was approached to resolve the management and election issues. (Paras 1, 4, 34)
Findings of Court:
The court decided to appoint a retired judge as 'Controller' to ensure orderly elections and manage the society's affairs until new office bearers are in place. (Paras 43, 45)
Issues: The main issues included the legitimacy of the elections and the management of the society amidst conflicting claims from different groups. (Paras 34, 42)
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of orderly conduct in elections to prevent chaos and disruption, delegating authority to a 'Controller' to oversee the process. (Paras 43, 45)
Result: Writ appeals disposed of with directions for orderly elections and management.
JUDGMENT :
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, 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 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 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.
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,
The court appointed a retired judge as 'Controller' to oversee elections and manage the affairs of the Andhra Evangelical Lutheran Church amidst conflicting claims of election to its central body.
THE POLICE CANNOT INTERFERE IN A PRIVATE AND CIVIL DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PARTIES.
Point of law: the cases filed before the elections and after the elections. Almost 26 cases have been filed at the relevant point of time in 19 Courts, besides, various other interim orders have also....
Court ruled that appointments made during disputes over elections declared void are invalid, emphasizing the necessity for duly elected governing bodies in administrative roles.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that wilful disobedience of a court order, including attempts to circumvent the order, constitutes contempt of court.
The court affirmed the validity of the election of the Committee of Management, emphasizing adherence to the Society's Bye-Laws and proper authority in convening meetings.
The court affirmed the validity of the Committee's elections under the Societies Registration Act, emphasizing adherence to bye-laws and authority established through prior judicial rulings.
Vacancies in society leadership require legally conducted elections under the Societies Registration Act.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
