Allowed

South Andhra Lutheran Church, v. The District Collector

Telangana HC25 Apr 2014WP/8981/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition challenging Revenue Authorities' interference in private property disputes. It held that revenue authorities cannot issue directions to police to maintain status quo in private civil matters and declared such interference impermissible.

What did the court decide?

The impugned letter dated 01.05.2004 was set aside; respondents directed not to interfere with petitioner society's civil and property matters.

South Andhra Lutheran Church, Vs The District… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶2

WRIT PETITION NO.8981 OF 2004

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

The writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents in interfering with the civil and property matters of the 1^st petitioner society and its vendees and the impugned letter bearing No.Ref.A/105/2004 dated 01.05.2004 of the 2^nd respondent and consequential proceedings of the respondents as illegal, null, void, without jurisdiction and malafide. 2) Heard.

¶5

3) The impugned communication dated 01.05.2004 addressed by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Railway Kodur to the Station House Officer, Kodur Police Station which reads as under:

¶6

“REVENUE DEPARRMENT

¶7

From To Sri K. Jaya Raj, The Station House Officer, Mandal Revenue Officer, Kodur PS Rly. Kodur.

¶8

Ref.A/105/2004 dated 01.05.2004

¶9

Sir,

¶10

Sub: SALC Kodur – Protectionof church properties situated in Kodur town – Regarding.

¶11

Ref: Observation of the District Collector, Cuddapah on the representation of M.J. Prabhakar, Secretary SALC dated Nill.

¶12

¶13

In pursuance of the telephonic instructions received from the District Collector, Cuddapah, with regard to sale of landed property of South Andhra Luthern Church in S.No.648/1 and 657/2E3 Status quo should be maintained till delivery of judgment in the Additional District Court, Tirupati in I.A.No.197 of 2004 in O.P.No.34 of 2004.

¶14

Hence, you are hereby requested to maintain status quo as

¶15

on to date without construction or demolition of present structures

¶16

in the above lands by any body.

¶17

Yours faithfully, Sd/Mandal Revenue Officer, Rly. Kodur.”

¶18

4) This Court while admitting the writ petition granted interim order dated 12.05.2004 in W.P.M.P.No.11580 of 2004 suspending the proceedings bearing No.Ref.A/105/2004 dated 01.05.2004 of the 2^nd respondent. In that view of the matter, this writ petition can be disposed of by making the said interim order as final order by declaring the interference of revenue authorities by way of addressing communication to the law enforcing authorities either to do a particular thing or to refrain from doing a particular thing in a particular manner in relation to private disputes as impermissible.

¶19

5) Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the proceedings bearing No.Ref.A/105/2004 dated 01.05.2004 of the 2^nd respondent. The respondents are directed not to interfere with the civil and property matters of the 1^st petitioner society in any manner whatsoever. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶20

___________________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶21

Date:25.04.2014. Gk

¶22

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶23

WRIT PETITION NO.8981 OF 2004

¶24

DATE: 2 5 TH APRIL, 2014.

¶25

South Andhra Lutheran Church, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

South Andhra Lutheran Church, v. The District Collector

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

Sri Saragadam Sivalakshmi, Vs Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd, Visakhapatnam

B. Gnanaprakash S/o Isack Vs The Mandal Revenue Officer

Meraka Suryanarayana Vs The District Collector

B.S.Subhakar, (died) by his L.R. Vs District Collector, Kurnool District

Smt. Karri Veerayyamma Vs The Mandal Revenue Officer

P. Gangadharam, Vs The District Registrar