Cbcnc Andhra Batish Town Church Vs the State of Ap

CBCNC ANDHRA BATISH TOWN CHURCH, REP. BY REV. DR. GUDAPATI JOSEPH RAJU, S/O.KRUPANANDAM, STATE SECRETARY, CBCNC AGED 62 YEARS, R/O.AKIVIDU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF AP, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-522238

¶14

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT BHIMAVARAM-534201.

¶15

THE JOINT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT BHIMAVARAM-534201.

¶16

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, BHIMAVARAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT-534201.

¶17

THE TAHSILDAR, AKIVIDU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT-534235.

¶18

AKIVIDU NAGAR PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, AKIVIDU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT-534235

¶19

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶20

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 topleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or

¶21

2

¶22

direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents in contemplating to dispossess the petitioner from the possession and enjoyment of land in an extent of Ac.2.32 Cents out of total extent of Ac.2.80 Cents situated in RS.No.473 of Akiveedu Village and Mandal, West Godavari District, by demolishing the existing structures therein i.e., Prayer Hall with Palmyra leaves pursuant to the proceedings of the 5th respondent/Tahsildar dated 09.06.2025 in Roc.No.779/2024/B, as confirmed by the 4 respondent/Revenue Divisional Officer in ROR Case No.1131/ROR/20 25 (DT), dated 18.09.2025, pending Revision before the 3rd respondent/Joint Collector vide Rc.No.409/2025/Coordination/RDO, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, malafide and against the Principles of Natural Justice and against the Constitutional Guarantees and to consequently direct the respondents not to demolish/remove the Prayer Hall with Palmyra leaves which is in existence and not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property in the interest of justice and to pass

¶23

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶24

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 pleased to direct the respondents not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioners in any manner including demolition/removal of the Prayer Hall with Palmyra leaves which is in existence and not to dispossess the petitioner from the property situated in an extent of Ac.2.32 Cents out of total extent of Ac.2.80 Cents in RS.No.473 of Akiveedu Village and Mandal, West Godavari District, during the pendency of the above writ petition in the interest of justice and to pass

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶26

1.K JYOTHI PRASAD

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶28

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶29

2.Yarraguntla.Koteswara Rao,Standing Counsel For Zilla Praja Parishads,Mandal Praja Parishads and Gra

¶30

3

¶31

The Court made the following Order:

¶32

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent Nos.1 to 5.

¶33

This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents in contemplating to dispossess the petitioner from the possession and enjoyment of land in an extent of Ac.2.32 cents out of total extent of Ac.2.80 cents situated in RS.No.473 of Akiveedu Village and Mandal, West Godavari District, by demolishing the existing structures therein i.e., prayer hall with palmyra leaves pursuant to the proceedings of the 5^th respondent/ Tahsildar dated 09.06.2025 in Roc.No.779/2024/B, as confirmed by the 4^th respondent/ Revenue Divisional Officer in ROR case No.1131/ROR/2025 (DT), dated 18.09.2025, pending revision before the 3^rd respondent/ Joint Collector vide Rc.No.409/2025/ Coordination/ RDO.

¶34

On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 5 relying upon the written instructions of the 3^rd respondent dated 04.04.2026 submits that the revision petition filed by the petitioner is pending for enquiry before the 3^rd respondent.

¶35

In view of the above said facts and circumstances, recording the said written instructions of the 3^rd respondent dated 04.04.2026, the 3^rd respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the revision petition of

¶36

4

¶37

the petitioner strictly in accordance with law by hearing all the parties concerned including the petitioner giving due opportunity, upon verification of the records and the subject land, appropriate decision shall be taken on its own merits as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four (4) months from the date of receipt of this order. It is open for the revision petitioner to seek any interim relief if so warranted before the revisional authority.

¶38

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. The written instructions of the 3^rd respondent dated 04.04.2026 shall be made as part of the court record. Interim order, if any, deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶39

As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand

¶40

closed.

¶41

_________________________ JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

¶42

06.04.2026 NNN

Cbcnc Andhra Batish Town Church v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cbcnc Andhra Batish Town Church v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vanteru Lakshmamma Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Kolkar Mabu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Ullipayala Usha Rani Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Mohammad Usman Baig Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

M Venkatesh Vs the State of Ap

T Ammulu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh