THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.29247 of 2010 Date: 29.09.2011 Between: Scott Memorial Baptists Church, Tuni, Reptd by its President- K.Chander Rao and another. ..... Petitioners AND Govt of A.P., Reptd by its Principal Secretary to Government, Roads and Buildings Department, Hyderabad And five others. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri K.S.Murthy Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 and 2: AGP for Roads and Buildings Counsel for respondent No.6: Sri T.Bheemanna For Sri S.Nageswara Reddy, Standing Counsel for Municipality Counsel for respondent Nos.3 to 5: AGP for Revenue The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in demolishing the compound wall and commencing construction of a new wall by moving into the graveyard land in Survey No.145, at Srinivasa Theatre road, Tuni, East Godavari District, belonging to petitioner No.1-organisation as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners sought for a direction to the respondents to handover the land back to petitioner No.1- organisation by reconstructing the compound wall duly compensating the petitioners for the damage and agony suffered by the community. The petitioners are maintaining a graveyard at the above-mentioned place. In order to provide a service road adjacent to Railway Over Bridge under construction, respondent No.5 has issued endorsement, dated 20.10.2010, wherein he has requested petitioner No.1- organisation to voluntarily handover the land to an extent of Ac.0.01 ½ cents. He has also stated in the said endorsement that as requested by petitioner No.1, an alternative site for the purpose of using the same as burial ground will be identified and handed over to it. The grievance of the petitioners is that even before identifying the alternative land and handing over the same, the respondents have started removing the compound wall and digging pits for raising a fresh compound wall by moving into the petitioners’ land. A counter-affidavit has been filed by respondent No.2, wherein it is inter alia pleaded that though the land in possession of the petitioners belongs to the Government, in order to respect the sentiments of the Christian community, petitioner No.1 was offered alternative land, and also agreed for reconstruction of the compound wall. At the hearing, Sri K.S.Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that even though by the above- mentioned endorsement and also in the counter-affidavit, filed as far back as December, 2010, the respondents have committed themselves to give away alternative land to petitioner No.1 after due identification, so far, they have not fulfilled their promise. Without going into the issue as to whether the said property belongs to the petitioners or to the Government, which lost its relevance having regard to the assurance given by respondent Nos.2 and 5 in the counter-affidavit and in the endorsement, respectively, it needs to be observed that while the taking over a part of the land being used as burial ground is in public interest, at the same time, the community interest also needs to be protected. As the respondents have committed themselves to provide alternative land to petitioner No.1-organisation, after identification, there can be no justification in delaying fulfilment of this commitment. Respondent Nos.2, 3 and 5 are directed to ensure that alternative land for the land which is being taken, over for the purpose of providing service road adjacent to Railway Over Bridge, from the petitioners is identified and provided to the petitioner No.1-organisation as expeditiously as possible, and not later than three months from today. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P.No.37245 of 2010 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. __________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 29th September 2011 DR