APHC010341642025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION No.18303/2025 Between: YAH SHUA WEH MESSIAH KINGDOM OF GOSPEL MINISTRIES CHURCH, YAH SHUA WEH MESSIAH KINGDOM OF GOSPEL MINISTRIES CHURCH REP BY ITS SECRETARY DAKI LOVAKUMARI, W/O. KOLLERI, D/O 5-58, OLD HARIJANAPETA THONDANG VILLAGE AND MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIATE, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, A.P POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, MANGALAGIRI, NATIONAL HIGHWAY, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KAKINDA DISTRICT AT KAKINADA. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KAKINADA DISTRICT AT KAKINADA. 5. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THONDANGI MANDAL POLICE STATION, AT VOTIMAMIDI, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 6. CANARA BANK ARM BRANCH, D.NO.28-14-1, FIRST FLOOR, OPP MELODY CINEMA THEATRE SURYABAGH, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530 020. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V.KRISHNA SWAROOP Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “.... a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the Respondents 2 to 5 despite representation dt.29-05-2025 made by the petitioner to protect the petitioner church Yah Shua Weh Messiah Kingdom of Gospel Ministries Door No.5- 58, old Harijanapeta Thondangi village Mandal, Kakinada District from the hands of the 6TH Respondent- Bank as illegal irregular, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and offends articles 14, 21, 300-A and 25 26 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents 2 to 5 to protect the petitioner church Yah Shua Weh Messiah Kingdom of Gospel Ministries and also direct the Respondent Bank authorities to reopen door lock of the church and hand over the same to the petitioner in the interest of justice.” 2. Heard Sri V.Krishna Swaroop, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Petitioner is a Church which is running in the house bearing D.No.5-58, Harijanapeta, Thondangi Village and Mandal, Kakinada. Learned counsel would further submit that, on 21.05.2025, the Bank Authorities along with the Police came to the Church and asked them to vacate the said premises on the ground that the owner of the said property failed to clear the loan due to the bank. It is further submitted that inspite of the representation dated 29.05.2025 made by the Petitioner to the Police seeking protection, no action has been taken. While so, on 24.06.2025 at about 11.00 a.m., Respondent No.6 – Bank authorities along with the Police came to the building premises and forcibly evicted the Petitioner, without issuing any notice or opportunity to the Church. 3 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that, the owners of the property availed loan from Respondent No.6 – Bank by mortgaging the said property. Subsequently, the said borrower had become Non-Performing Asset and then the Bank Authorities exercised their right under SARFAESI Act and have taken the symbolic possession of the said property. It is further submitted that, as per the said Act, the Bank Authorities required to take physical possession of the mortgaged property with the help of Executive Magistrate by conducting panchanama. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would further submit that, at the request of the Bank Officials, the Police arranged protection to them while taking possession of the said property. Hence, prayed to dismiss the petition. 5. Considering the submissions made and a fair look at the material placed on record, as rightly put by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, the Petitioner is not the owner of the subject property and the Church is being run in the said property on rental basis. The original owners of the said property having obtained a mortgage loan, committed default in payment of the same and have become NPA. As such, the Bank Authorities initiated the proceedings under SARFAESI Act and had taken over possession of the said property in which the Petitioner-Church is being run and locked the said property. In such circumstances, the Petitioner-Church being a tenant, is not entitled to the relief claimed. This Court does not find 4 any merit in this matter. The writ petition lacks merit and the same is liable to be dismissed. 6. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:05.08.2025 Dinesh 5 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.18303 of 2025 Dt.05.08.2025 Dinesh