Disposed

G. Vijayalaxmi, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC15 Feb 2023WP/1006/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the District Collector to hold an enquiry with personal site inspection and hearing regarding the proximity of a temple to a masjid and potential communal tension. A direction was issued to maintain status quo with limited construction allowable.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No. 2 to conduct inquiry with personal inspection. Direction to maintain status quo limiting construction to temporary protective structures.

G. Vijayalaxmi, Vs The State of Andhra… — Municipal and Town Planning | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.1006 of 2023

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

It is a case of the petitioners that respondent Nos.8 to 10 have taken up construction of a temple in front of an existing masjid in Edururu Village of Kurnool Mandal and District and the same would result in communal tension in the area. It is the further contention of the petitioners that the District Collector, while granting permission for construction of the temple had relied upon the report of the Mandal Parishad Development Officer (MPDO) certifying that the masjid was at a distance from the temple, even though the temple is being constructed in front of the masjid.

¶5

The petitioners also contend that the report of the MPDO on the basis of which the Collector had passed the order had also made an incorrect statement that there are no temples in the village when quite a few temples exist in the village.

¶6

Sri K. Viswanadh, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.9 and 10 would submit that respondent No.8 has passed away on 18.10.2022 and the Writ Petition would have to be dismissed against respondent No.8. He would further

¶7

¶8

submit that the location of the temple is at a distance from the masjid as there is a road in between the temple and the masjid and the temple is being built at a distance from the road also. He would further submit that there are no temples in the village as the original site of the village was inundated and the entire village was shifted to a new location due to which no temples are available in the village.

¶9

The question of whether the construction of the temple would lead to communal tension in the area and whether the temple and the masjid are in close proximity are issues of fact which have to be gone into by the competent authority, i.e., respondent No.2.

¶10

In that view of the matter, it would be appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition with a direction to respondent No.2 to undertake an enquiry as to the location of the temple and whether such location of the temple could lead to any future difficulties in the area. Further, this enquiry shall be conducted by respondent No.2 by personally inspecting the site and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners as well as respondent Nos.9 and 10. This exercise shall be carried out expeditiously and preferably within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of this order.

¶11

¶12

It is reported that the temple has been partially constructed and the idols have already been installed in the temple.

¶13

This contention is disputed by the petitioners and the respondent No.2 would also verify whether the idols have been formally installed and consecrated.

¶14

Thereafter, these facts will also be taken into account by 2^nd respondent while taking a decision in this regard. In order to maintain status quo till respondent No.2 takes a decision, it would be appropriate to direct that no construction be carried out in the temple, except to the extent of any temporary structure to protect the idols.

¶15

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶16

Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶17

____________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

MJA

15.02.2023

137

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶23

WRIT PETITION No.1006 of 2023

¶24

15.02.2023

¶25

MJA

G. Vijayalaxmi, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G. Vijayalaxmi, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Seethala Venkata Rama Rao Vs the State of Ap

Koparthi Desamma Vs the State of Ap

Usha Buildcon Vs Sri S.S.Rawat

T Naresh Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Barala Gangadhara Sathya Varma Vs the State of Ap

Alluri Ramanamma Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh