(Prayer: 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 tomay be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent in sanctioning the conversion of land allotted for public purposes to grave yard vide its circular Roc. No. 1004/2020/G1 dated 28-11-2024 without considering the objections even after the direction of the Honorable High Court in WP (PIL) No.79 of 2020 knowing fully aware of the objections of the locality residents as collusive. Illegal, arbitrary, unjust and against procedure of Law and in violation of the principles of natural Justice and to pass such

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

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 IA NO: 2 OF 2025

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 may be pleased to hear the Main Writ Petition vide No. 4237 of 2025 on an expedite basis taking into consideration of the urgency involved in the interest of Justice and equity and pass)

1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the issuance of proceedings vide ROC.No.1004/2020/G1, dated 28.11.2024, whereby the representation of the 5th respondent was considered and permission to utilize the one acre of land forming part and parcel of RS.No.344/1,2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 and RS.No.501 of Gunupudi Revenue Village, Bhimavaram for the purpose of graveyard was granted.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that W.P.(PIL).No. 79 of 2020 was filed by the petitioner against the action of the 5th respondent and another in constructing unauthorized Christian Graveyard in the land where there is an existing Church. The said land is in the middle of Bhimavaram Town and construction of a burial ground in the midest of habitation would lead to unnecessary law and order problems. W.P.(PIL).No.79 of 2020 was disposed off by giving liberty to the respondent-Corporation to take necessary action on the representation/application made for usage of the land in question as burial ground by strictly adhering to the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965. A further direction that no burial activity shall be carried out in the proposed land till consideration of such representation.

3. It is submitted that the land where the 5th respondent intends to utilize the same for burial ground is a prime land in the middle of Bhimavaram Town and that the nearby residents follow different faiths. In this regard, representations were made to respondent Nos.3 and 4 seeking their intervention to allot the land to Government Hospital and put it to use for the general public.

4. It is submitted that during the year 2019, the 5th respondent started constructing Christian graveyard in a portion of land which was allotted to a Missionary Hospital without any permission and without following due process of law. It is stated that several representations were submitted seeking action against the 5th respondent in trying to convert the prime land into a burial ground. It is stated that on account of inaction of the official respondents in taking appropriate action against the several representations, the petitioner filed W.P.(PIL).No.79 of 2020.

5. It is submitted that though the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court directed the 3rd respondent to take necessary action on the representations and application for use of the land as burial ground by strictly adhering to the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965. It is submitted that the 3rd respondent has passed proceedings dated 28.11.2024 duly according permission for utilization of the land for graveyard purposes. It is submitted that the petitioner’s peace is at stake on account of the unauthorized proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent.

6. The learned standing counsel for respondent No.3 filed a counter and submits that the proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent are strictly in terms of the directions of the Orders of this Court in W.P.(PIL).No.79 of 2020. It is also submitted that Section 300 to 307 of Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965 outline the provisions relating to disposal of the dead and related matters. It is also submitted that the 3rd respondent has invited objections from the general public by giving 30 days notice in terms of Section 301 of Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965. It is also submitted that the said notice was prominently displayed on the notice boards of Office of the Bhimavaram Municipal Corporation, Office of the Tahsildar, Bhimavaram, RDO Office, Bhimavaram, Office of District Collector, West Godavari District, Bhimavaram, Head Post Office, Bhimavaram and Sub-Registrar Offices, Bhimavaram and Gunupudi.

7. It is submitted that the 3rd respondent did not receive any written objections or written suggestions even after the completion of the 30- day notice period ending on 19.10.2024. It is also submitted that the matter was placed before the Special Officer of the 3rd respondent Corporation and the Council vide Resolution No.387, dated 25.11.2024 approved the file. On 28.11.2024 the approval for setting up the graveyard was issued.

8. The learned standing counsel further submits that as per the approved master plan of Bhimavaram Municipal Corporation issued under G.O.Ms.No.9, Municipal Administration and Urban Development (H1) Department, dated 17.01.2024, the land in question is earmarked for public and semi-public use. It is also submitted that the subject land is adjoining an existing burial ground. The learned standing counsel also submits that Regulation 3.5 of the Zoning Regulations of Bhimavaram Master Plan defines Public and Semi-Public Zone. Sub-Clause 3.5.10 would permit establishment of a Crematory within the designated zone.

9. It is submitted that the 3rd respondent has strictly complied with the directions issued by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(PIL).No.79 of 2020.

10. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the 3rd respondent. Perused the material on record.

11. The petitioner makes reference to representation dated 23.04.2019 and a representation dated 06.01.2025. The petitioner filed W.P.(PIL).No.79 of 2020 by referring to the representation dated 23.04.2019. Thereafter, representation dated 06.01.2025 brings about the objection of the petitioner and other residents on converting a prime land earmarked for public purposes into a graveyard.

12. The petitioner appears to be espousing the cause of general public in the present writ petition. Though reference of several representations is made in the writ petition none of the representations submitted by anyone including the petitioner are placed on record. The alleged representation dated 06.01.2025 does not bear the endorsement of the 3rd respondent.

13. Section 300 to 307 of the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965 would refer to disposal of the dead bodies and the procedure contemplated therewith. The notice calling for objections/suggestions was issued in terms of Section 301 of Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965. As stated in the counter, the notice calling for objection was placed before the concerned officers in terms of the procedure. The petitioner has neither denied the notice nor disputed the issuance of said notices by filing a reply/ rejoinder.

14. When the 3rd respondent has followed the procedure as contemplated under law and passed orders in terms of the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965, this Court cannot interfere with the impugned proceedings. The 3rd respondent has also complied with the directions of this Court in W.P.(PIL).No.79 of 2020 and passed orders which are under challenge. The challenge to impugned proceedings cannot be interfered with when the 3rd respondent has adhered to the procedure as contemplated under Section 300 to 307 of the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965.

15. That apart, the Clause 3.5 and Sub-clause 3.5.10 of the Regulations relating to the Bhimavaram Master Plan would entitle utilization of public places for setting up crematory.

16. On these considerations, this Court finds no grounds to interfere with the impugned proceedings and accordingly, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

17. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.