APHC010437522026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] TUESDAY, THE 1st DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 24012/2026 Between: 1. REV DR S JOHN BABU RAO, S/O JAYARAO, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC PARISH PASTOR, ST. MATHEWS LUTHERAN CHURCH, NORTH PARISH, CENTRAL GUNTUR SYNOD, R/O. ST. MATHEWS NORTH PARISH PARSONAGE, BECKER COMPOUND, BRODIPET, GUNTUR - 522002, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MINORITY WELFARE DEPARTMENT VELAGAPUDI AMARAVATI GUNTUR DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH 522237 2. THE ANDHRA EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH AELC, REPRESENTED BY ITS HIGH COURT- APPOINTED CONTROLLER, BECKER COMPOUND, BRODIPET, GUNTUR - 522002, ANDHRA PRADESH 3. THE ADMINISTRATOR ANDHRA EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH AELC, BECKER COMPOUND, BRODIPET, GUNTUR - 522002, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. REV J ADAM KENNEDY, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, CLAIMING TO BE PARISH PASTOR OF ST. MATHEWS LUTHERAN CHURCH, NORTH PARISH, GUNTUR - 522002, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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 tossue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to Declare the action of the Respondents 3 herein in issuing Proceedings No. 126/Disc/26 dated 07-08-2026 suspending the Petitioner from the post of Parish Pastor, St. Mathews Lutheran Church, North Parish, Central Guntur Synod, without giving any valid reason, and issuing Proceedings No. 256/App/26 dated 07-08-2026 appointing and transferring the 4th Respondent in place of the Petitioner as being wholly arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Consequently set aside the Proceedings No. 126/Disc/26 dated 07-08-2026 and Proceedings No. 256/App/26 dated 07- 08-2026 issued by the 3rd Respondent IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 Stay all further operation, execution, implementation, and enforcement of Proceedings No. 126/Disc/26 dated 07-08- 2026 (suspension order) and Proceedings No. 256/App/26 dated 07-08-2026 (appointment/transfer order of Respondent No. 4) issued by the 3rd Respondent pending disposal of the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MANNAM RAJA SEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. M SRIKANTH 2. GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE 3. CHEVURI RAMA SWAMY 3 The Court made the following Order:- This writ petition is filed against the action of the Respondent No.3 in issuing Proceedings No. 126/Disc/26 dated 07.08.2026, suspending the petitioner from the post of Parish Pastor, St. Mathews Lutheran Church, North Parish, Central Guntur Synod, without giving any valid reason and issuing Proceedings No. 256/App/26 dated 07.08.2026 appointing and transferring the 4th Respondent in place of the petitioner. 2. Learned Senior Counsel, Sri C.Nageshwara Rao, assisted by Sri M. Rajasekhar, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner, submits that the 3rd respondent has passed the impugned order dated 07.08.2026, whereby the petitioner was suspended from his pastoral duties as Parish Pastor, St. Mathews Lutheran Church, North Parish, Central Guntur Synod, Guntur, pending completion of enquiry into the allegations levelled against him. 3. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is that he had addressed a meeting and encouraged the pastors who were found ineligible and whose names were removed from the rolls on the ground that they had submitted forged certificates. Learned Senior Counsel submits that the impugned proceedings do not disclose any specific reason for suspending the petitioner, except referring to the alleged address made by the petitioner on 09.07.2026 at a meeting conducted at Hotel Annapurna, Guntur. 4. It is further submitted that it is not the case of respondent No.3 that the petitioner was found ineligible or that he had submitted any forged certificate. 4 It is also contended that respondent No.3 has assumed the role of the Controller, whereas his role is confined to assisting the Controller in conducting elections. According to the learned Senior Counsel, the impugned proceedings have been issued without any valid ground and only to ensure the petitioner to participate in the elections. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent No.3 submits that the petitioner had earlier filed W.P.No.22740 of 2026 on the same set of facts and circumstances and the said writ petition is withdrawn by seeking liberty to workout remedies available under law. It is also submitted that the competent authority under Section 23 of the A.P. Societies Registration Act, 2001, would be the District Collector concerned to adjudicate the dispute with regard to the membership and expulsion of members. 6. Learned Senior Counsel, in reply submits that the petitioner submitted S.O.P. C.F.R. No.8075 on 12.08.2026 before the learned District Judge, Guntur. The same was returned by the by raising office objections, and after resubmission, it was again returned on 13.08.2026, referring to Objection No.2. 7. Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3. 8. As seen from the objection raised by the Office of the District Judge, Guntur, the petitioner is required to explain the jurisdiction of the District Court to entertain the petition against the order passed by the Administrator, 5 appointed pursuant to the orders of this Court dated 03.04.2025. The remedy available to the petitioner is to resubmit the S.O.P. after complying with the objections raised and seek for calling upon the bench for clarifying the objections. 9. On these considerations, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition at this stage. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to resubmit the S.O.P. by complying with the objections raised. Needless to state, the learned District Judge, Guntur, is competent to entertain the S.O.P., and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law. 10. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 01.09.2026 RSD 6 50 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 24012/2026 01.09.2026 RSD