##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN

WRIT PETITION No.16736 of 2026

DATE: 21.05.2026

Between:

Ashok Thalari and another

… Petitioners

AND

The State of Telangana,

Rep. by its Principal Secretary,

Minority Welfare, Secretariat Buildings , Secretariat,

Hyderabad and 4 others

… Respondents

ORDER:

Heard Sri G.Bhasker Reddy, learned counsel for the

petitioners; learned counsel for the respondents and perused the

material on record.

2. The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

“……be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, more particularly,

one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of

the Respondent No.4 and 5 in manipulating and tampering with

the voter list consisting of the 39^th Diocesan Council members as

illegal, and arbitrary, in as much as the action of the Respondent

No.4 & 5 would vitiate the process of the proposed Bishopric

elections and impact the outcome of the election results, and,

consequently suspending the Bishopric Elections for the Diocese of

Dornakal, scheduled on 20^th May 2026, and directing the

Respondent No.2 to re-notify the same by issuing a fresh

"mandate" after rectifying the defects and manipulations

committed by the Respondent No.4 under the rules in force that

govern the Respondent Organization; and grant such other relief

as it deems fit in the circumstances of the case. .”

::2::

3. The petitioners are members of the Diocesan Council of the

Church of South India (CSI) Diocese of Dornakal (respondent No.4).

The present writ petition is filed challenging the elections to the

office of the Bishop of Dornakal Diocese scheduled to be held on

20.05.2026. The grievance of the petitioners is with regard to the

alleged manipulation and tampering of the voters’ list consisting of

the members of the 39^th Diocesan Council members. Specific

allegations include removal of some members of the council and the

addition of others after issuance of the Moderator’s mandate

M1/03/558/2025, dated 22.12.2025 by the office of the Moderator.

The petitioners further allege that as many as 24 members of the

existing Bishop’s family and close relatives have been inducted into

the council and that the right of the respondent Nos.2 to 3 to

conduct the elections to the office of respondent No.4 is sub-judice

in W.P. No.1218 of 2026.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners in answer to the query of

the Court about the maintainability of a Writ of Mandamus under

Article 226 of the Constitution of India against respondent Nos.2 to

5 concerning the internal election of a Bishop submits as under:

That the respondent No.2 church, through it’s Synod and Diocese,

performs public duties by managing over Schools, Colleges and

Hospitals. Learned counsel relies upon the Full Bench Judgment

::3::

of the Madras High Court in D. Bright Joseph v. the Church of

South India¹. It is further contended that the process of electing a

Bishop, who heads a Diocese administering these institutions

directly impacts the quality of education and healthcare falling

under Article 21 and 21A of the Constitution of India. The change

in the electoral college after the issuance of the said Mandate is

submitted to be illegal and arbitrary and vitiating the entire election

process.

5. Per contra, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Social

Welfare submits that the relief sought in the writ petition pertains

to the internal election of a religious body, which is beyond the

scope of judicial review of this Court. It is argued that the dispute is

essentially a private election dispute with no public ailment.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader further contends that the

petitioners have an efficacious alternative remedy challenging the

election within the churches owned by synod or by filing the civil

suit before the competent Court.

6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader further submits that

W.P.No.1218 of 2026 pertains to different issue and does not have

any relevance in the adjudication of the present writ pe