Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 1169
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Harinath.N, J
RAMAYANAM SUBBA RAO – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO: 4237/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Almas Begum Mohammed
For the Respondents: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV, Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni, GP FOR REVENUE
A court will not interfere with a municipal authority's decision to convert land use if the authority has followed the statutory procedure, including issuing public notices for objections and adhering to the approved Master Plan and zoning regulations.
Headnote:The petitioner challenged the sanctioning of land for a graveyard in Gunupudi Revenue Village, Bhimavaram, under the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965, alleging that the conversion of prime land for public purposes was arbitrary and violated the principles of natural justice. The court found that the municipal authority had strictly adhered to the statutory procedure by issuing a 30-day public notice for objections as required under the Act and that the land was earmarked for public and semi-public use under the approved Master Plan. The primary issue was whether the municipal authority's action in granting permission for the graveyard was illegal or procedurally flawed. The court reasoned that since the authority invited objections through prominent public notices and received no written objections within the stipulated period, and further complied with the zoning regulations of the Master Plan, there was no ground for judicial interference in the administrative decision. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to the administrative sanction of land for a graveyard based on location and public interest. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. compliance with statutory notice requirements and zoning regulations under the municipal act and master plan. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. verification of procedural adherence to the andhra pradesh municipalities act, 1965. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. lack of grounds for judicial interference when statutory and zoning procedures are followed. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
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 tomay be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent in sanctioning the conversion of land allotted for public purposes to grave yard vide its circular Roc. No. 1004/2020/G1 dated 28-11-2024 without considering the objections even after the direction of the Honorable High Court in WP (PIL) No.79 of 2020 knowing fully aware of the objections of the locality residents as collusive. Illegal, arbitrary, unjust and against procedure of Law and in violation of the principles of natural Justice and to pass such
IA NO: 1 OF 2025
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
IA NO: 2 OF 2025
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 to hear the Main Writ Petition vide No. 4237 of 2025 on an expedite basis taking into consideration of the urgency involved in the interest of Justice and equity and pass
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the issuance of proceedings vide ROC.No.1004/2020/G1, dated 28.11.2024, whereby the representation of the 5th respondent was considered and permission to utilize the one acre of land forming part and parcel of RS.No.344/1,2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 and RS.No.501 of Gunupudi Revenue Village, Bhimavaram for the purpose of graveyard was granted.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that W.P.(PIL).No. 79 of 2020 was filed by the petitioner against the action of the 5th respondent and another in constructing unauthorized Christian Graveyard in the land where there is an existing Church. The said land is in the middle of Bhimavaram Town and construction of a burial ground in the midest of habitation would lead to unnecessary law and order problems.
W.P.(PIL).No.79 of 2020 was disposed off by giving liberty to the respondent-Corporation to take necessary action on the representation/application made for usage of the land in question as burial ground by strictly adhering to the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965. A further direction that no burial activity shall be carried out in the proposed land till consideration of such representation.
3. It is submitted that the land where the 5th respondent intends to utilize the same for burial ground is a prime land in the middle of Bhimavaram Town and that the nearby residents follow different faiths. In this regard, representations were made to respondent Nos.3 and 4 seeking their intervention to allot the land to Government Hospital and put it to use for the general public.
4. It is submitted that during the year 2019, the 5th respondent started constructing Christian graveyard in a portion of land which was allotted to a Missionary Hospital without any permission and without following due process of law. It is stated that several representations were submitted seeking action against the 5th respondent in trying to convert the prime land into a burial ground. It is stated that on account of inaction of the official respondents in taking appropriate action against the several representations, the petitioner filed W.P.(PIL).No.
