IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS, MADURAI BENCH
V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J.
Stephen - Petitioner
Versus
The District Collector, Nagercoil and Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(MD) No.16435 of 2022 & W.M.P.(MD) Nos.11867 of 2022 and 16274 and 16275 of 2022
Decided On : 21-12-2022
Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 - Writ of Mandamus - Administration - Seeking 'not to disturb - Suicide - Branch - Held, This Court on considering nature of prayer sought for in said petition and taking note of that there is no need to get any prior permission from any Authority for assembling and conducting prayer in dwelling house of respondent disposed of said petition - However a direction was issued to official respondents to take appropriate action in accordance with law against respondent if there is any nuisance being caused due to noise pollution for any other bona fide reasons to general public - Writ Petition Dismissed.
ORDER :
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the official respondents from granting any permission for starting a church at Door No.24/45-1 in Survey No.391/14, Kaliakavilai Village, Vilavancode Taluk, Kanyakumari District by the 4th and 5th respondents based on the petitioner's representation dated 06.07.2022 within a period stipulated by the Court.)
1. The present Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the official respondents from granting any permission for starting a church at Door No.24/45-1 in Survey No. 391/14, Kaliakavilai Village, Vilavancode Taluk, Kanyakumari District by the 4th and 5th respondents based on the petitioner's representation dated 06.07.2022 within a period stipulated by the Court.
2. The brief facts of the case, as averred by the petitioner, is as follows:-
The petitioner is the Secretary of the Church of Indian Bethal at Karimbumavilai, Thiruthuvapuram Post, Kaliakavilai Village, Kanyakumari District and the 4th respondent was an assistant to the pastor, namely, Mr. Arthur David and due to his mis-behavior with the female members of the church, a police complaint was lodged and the same is also pending against him. In view of the said act, he was expelled from the church. In order to create problem within the church administration, he purchased a small piece of land next to the church, on 22.06.2020 and by getting building permission for dwelling house, a building was also constructed in that place. Converting the said house, he started prayer meetings in the said house and slowly it was converted as church. Hence the petitioner gave a detailed representation to the respondents on 16.07.2020 and subsequently filed a writ petition in W.P.(MD) No: 8699 of 2022 to consider the representation of the petitioner and the same was disposed by this Court based on the undertaking given by the 4th respondent. Suppressing the above facts the 4th respondent filed Crl.O.P (MD) No. 7703 of 2022 seeking 'not to harass', the same was dismissed and subsequently the 5th respondent filed a Writ Petition (MD). No.8710 of 2022 seeking 'not to disturb his house, prayer activities along with his family members, relatives and friends conducting his house prayer activities in Door No.24/45-1, Thiruthuvapuram, Kanyakumari District' and this Court vide order dated 29.04.2022 disposed of the same by granting permission for assembling and conducting prayer in the dwelling house, however, permitted the official respondents to take action, if there is any nuisance being caused to general public. Therefore, the Writ Petitioner submitted a representation to the respondents on 06.07.2022 and since the respondents have not taken any action, the present Writ Petition has been filed.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that narrating all the above said facts, the petitioner has submitted a detailed representation to all the official respondents on 06.07.2022 and the official respondents having received the same, failed to take action against the respondents 4 and 5, hence this Writ Petition.
4. It is the contention of the 2nd respondent that originally the dispute prevails between the petitioner and 4th respondent for conducting prayer. The petitioner has lodged complaint before the 2nd respondent 06.07.2022, after the receipt of the complaint, C.S.R. No. 527 of 2022 was registered and enquiry was conducted by summoning both the parties. Since the dispute between the parties are in continuous process for several years and in order maintain public peace, the dispute between them was referred to the 3rd respondent vide C.No. 38/LIR/T9PS/1011 dated 10.07.2022. The petitioner and the 4th respondent are having every liberty to contest the proceedings before the 3rd respondent, thereby sought to dismiss the petition.
5. It is the contention of respondents 4 and 5 that they purchased 5 cents of land in the village and
A writ of mandamus cannot be issued to bypass regulatory procedures for the establishment of a religious institution where the premises were constructed under a different designation through misrepre....
The Building Rules do not permit conversion of a residential building into a Prayer Hall, and the decision was based on the sensitive nature of the locality and the wishes of the 80% of the local peo....
The right to practice religion is guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution of India, but it is subject to reasonable restrictions for public safety and to avoid potential religious clashes.
No permission for prayer meetings in residential building absent lease clause permitting such use.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.