M/S. Amaravati Parirakshana ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 6627 AP

                                1
                                                                  CMR, J.
                                                      W.P.No.28377 of 2022




 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

                 Writ Petition No.28377 of 2022

ORDER:

This Writ Petition for mandamus is initially filed to declare

the inaction of the respondents in not granting permission to the

1st petitioner Trust to conduct Maha Padayatra from 'Amaravati to

Arasavalli' from Sri Venkateswara Swamy Temple, Venkatapalem,

Amaravati Capital City to Arasavalli, Sri Suryanarayana Swamy

Temple in Srikakulam District, as per the schedule and route map

furnished to the respondents, as illegal and violative of Articles

19(1)(a), 19(1)(b) and 19(1)(d) of the Constitution of India and

consequently, sought direction to the respondents 2 to 18 to

forthwith grant permission to the 1st petitioner Trust to conduct

the said Maha Padayatra as per the route map submitted by them

to the respondents.

2) The petitioners also, as per the permission accorded to the

petitioners in I.A.No.2 of 2022 to amend the prayer, sought

declaration that the impugned order, dated 08.09.2022, in

Rc.No.1051/L&O-III/2022 passed by the 2nd respondent -

Director General of Police, State of Andhra Pradesh, rejecting

permission to conduct Maha Padayatra, as illegal, arbitrary and

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

violative of Articles 19(1)(a), 19(1)(b) and 19(1)(d) of the

Constitution of India and consequently, sought permission to the

1st petitioner Trust to conduct Maha Padayatra as per the

schedule submitted by them from 12.09.2022 to 11.11.2022, by

permitting the respondent police officials to regulate the said

Maha Padayatra according to Section 30(3) of the Police Act, 1861

and also prayed to pass any order deemed fit in the circumstances

of the case by moulding the relief if necessary in the interest of

justice.

3) Facts germane to dispose of this Writ Petition may briefly be

stated as follows:

(a) The 1st petitioner is a charitable trust registered in the

name and style "M/s.Amaravati Parirakshna Samiti", represented

by its Secretary. As per the case pleaded by the petitioners, its

main object is to protect the interest of farmers, who have

sacrificed their livelihood by giving their agricultural lands to the

Government for establishing capital city for the newly carved out

State of Andhra Pradesh under the Land Pooling Scheme carved

out under Andhra Pradesh Capital Region Development Authority

Act (hereinafter called as "A.P. CRDA Act") and the Rules made

thereunder of 2015. It is stated that about 30,000 farmers have

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

given their lands for the purpose of forming the capital city and

they have also surrendered their lands to the Government for the

said purpose. However, after there is a change in the

administrative affairs of the State Government, a proposal was

made to introduce the new concept of having three capitals for the

State of Andhra Pradesh. An enactment was also brought into

existence by the present Government. The farmers, who felt

aggrieved by the same, have questioned the decision of the

Government in abolishing the AP CRDA Act and bringing new

enactment in its place to establish three capitals for the present

State of Andhra Pradesh. It is alleged that some of the farmers

have challenged the abolition of the AP CRDA Act in the High

Court. It is further stated that the petitioners have also to air

their grievance and to raise their voice to convince the authorities

at the helm of the present Government to reconsider their decision

that they have previously held Maha Padayatra from Amaravati to

Tirupati. When a permission was rejected by the police to conduct

the said Maha Padayatra that they have conducted the said Maha

Padayatra as per the directions given by this Court in a writ

petition filed by the 1st petitioner Trust. It is alleged that now the

1st petitioner Trust and its members intend to conduct Maha

Padayatra with the farmers from Amaravati to Arasavalli to air

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

their voice to ventilate their grievance from 12.09.2022 to

11.11.2022. Therefore, when a written request was made to the

2nd respondent Director General of Police and other respondents,

who are Superintendents of Police of the districts through which

they intend to conduct Maha Padayatra from Amaravati to

Arasavalli, on 27.08.2022, that no decision is taken on their

written request. Therefore, it is alleged that the petitioners have

filed the instant Writ Petition seeking the aforesaid declaration

and reliefs.

4) When the Writ Petition was listed for admission on

08.09.2022, learned Government Pleader for Home, on written

instructions, which are placed on record, submitted that the 2 nd

respondent Director General of Police has obtained inputs from

the Superintendents of Police of all the 16 districts i.e.

respondents 3 to 18 and that he would pass orders on that day.

Therefore, this Court has directed to list the matter today and

directed the learned Government Pleader for Home to produce

copy of the order that would be passed by the 2nd respondent

Director General of Police.

5) Accordingly, the learned Government Pleader for Home as

well as the petitioners have produced copy of the order dated

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

08.09.2022 passed by the 2nd respondent Director General of

Police. The 2nd respondent Director General of Police by the

impugned order has rejected the permission to the petitioners to

conduct Maha Padayatra.

6) Therefore, the petitioners have filed I.A.No.2 of 2022 today

seeking amendment of the prayer in the Writ Petition to set aside

the impugned order declaring the same as unconstitutional and

violative of Articles 19(1)(a), 19(1)(b) and 19(1)(d) of the

Constitution of India. The said I.A.No.2 of 2022 is allowed

permitting the petitioners to amend the prayer of the Writ Petition

as sought for.

7) Therefore, apartfrom the aforesaid reliefs claimed in the

original writ petitioner, the petitioners also prayed to set aside the

impugned order rejecting permission to the petitioners to conduct

Maha Padayatra.

8) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents 1 to

18.

9) Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the

farmers, who have sacrificed their livelihood and surrendered their

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

agricultural lands for the purpose of establishing the capital city

in Amaravati area in the State of Andhra Pradesh, are aggrieved

by the decision taken by the present Government in introducing a

new concept of establishing three capitals for the State of Andhra

Pradesh giving a go-by to the earlier enactment of AP CRDA Act by

abolishing the same and bringing a new enactment in its place,

which is also challenged in the High Court by way of filing various

Writ Petitions, whereby this Court has held in favour of the

farmers and gave certain directions to the Government to take

steps for immediate development of capital area by using the

lands that are given by the farmers. He would submit that yet no

steps are taken by the Government till now to implement the

directions given by this Court in the said Writ Petitions and as

such, to ventilate their grievance and to air their voice that they

now intend to conduct Maha Padayatra from Amaravati to

Arasavalli. He would submit that right to assemble peacefully and

right to travel to any part of the country and to air their voice to

ventilate their grievance is the fundamental right of the farmers

and members of the 1st petitioner Trust and they are entitled for

permission to conduct Maha Padayatra peacefully as per the route

map submitted by them to the police and as per the schedule

given by them relating to the said Maha Padayatra.

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

10) Learned counsel for the petitioners would also submit that

earlier when the 1st petitioner Trust intends to conduct Maha

Padayatra from Amaravati to Tirupati also, the police rejected

permission to them and this Court as per the order passed in

W.P.No.25154 of 2021, dated 29.10.2021, accorded permission to

the 1st petitioner Trust for conducting Maha Padayatra by

directing the police to accord permission to them to conduct Maha

Padayatra by imposing reasonable restrictions and to take care of

law and order situation and the public order. He would submit

that again the 2nd respondent Director General of Police rejected

permission to the petitioners on the self same grounds that there

is a possibility of law and order problem being arisen during the

Maha Padayatra. He would submit that the grounds on which the

2nd respondent Director General of Police rejected permission to

the petitioners by the impugned order are legally unsustainable

and that the impugned order is not valid under law. Therefore, he

would pray to set aside the impugned order and accord

permission to the 1st petitioner Trust to conduct Maha Padayatra

and to direct the respondent police officials to accord permission

to the petitioners to conduct Maha Padayatra by imposing

reasonable restrictions and conditions.

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

11) Per contra, learned Government Pleader for Home appearing

for the respondents, while vehemently opposing the writ petition

and by supporting the impugned order passed by the 2 nd

respondent Director General of Police, would submit that

eventhough the petitioners got constitutional right and

fundamental right to take procession by conducting Maha

Padayatra to ventilate their grievance, they cannot cause

disturbance to the public order and create law and order problem.

He would submit that earlier when this Court permitted the 1st

petitioner Trust to conduct Maha Padayatra from Amaravati to

Tirupati by imposing certain conditions and also by giving certain

directions, that the members of the 1st petitioner Trust have

grossly violated the said conditions imposed by this Court as well

as the police in the order passed permitting them to conduct Maha

Padayatra in terms of the directions given by this Court and about

71 criminal cases were also registered against the members of the

1st petitioner Trust for violating the directions of this Court and

also the directions of the police and the said cases are now

pending trial. Therefore, he would submit that when such is the

conduct of the members of the 1st petitioner Trust, as they have

previously grossly violated the conditions and directions imposed

for conducting Maha Padayatra that they are now not entitled for

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

permission. He would submit that taking into consideration the

said previous incidents and conduct of the 1st petitioner Trust that

the 2nd respondent Director General of Police has now rejected

pe4rmission to the petitioners to conduct Maha Padayatra. He

would also submit that as the Government intended to establish

executive capital for the State in Visakhapatnam and as the

members of the 1st petitioner Trust intend to pass through the

said District also now during the Maha Padayatra that there may

be strong resistance from the people of cross section, who are

favouring the decision of the Government to have the executive

capital in Visakhapatnam and it may also cause disturbance to

the public peace and tranquillity and that there is every possibility

for breaking law and order in the said area, if the members of the

1st petitioner Trust pass through the said area. Therefore, he

would submit that taking into consideration all the said facts, that

the 2nd respondent Director General of Police has rightly declined

permission to the 1st petitioner Trust by the impugned order. He

would submit that the impugned order is perfectly sustainable

under law and the same is not liable to be set aside. Therefore,

the learned Government Pleader for Home would pray for

dismissal of the Writ Petition.

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

12. Learned Government Pleader for Home would also submit

that the petitioners have already challenged the decision of the

Government in abolishing the AP CRDA Act and bringing a new

enactment in its place to establish three capitals for the State of

Andhra Pradesh and the said Writ Petitions were allowed and the

subsequent applications filed by them for implementing the

directions of the Court are also pending adjudication by this Court

and as they have already taken recourse to the legal proceedings

for redressal of their grievance that the petitioners are not justified

again to take out a public procession by conducting Maha

Padayatra. Therefore, learned Government Pleader for Home has

opposed the claim of the petitioners on the aforesaid ground also.

13. The material facts relating to the lis are not in controversy.

Admittedly, about 30,000 farmers relating to A.P. Capital Region

have surrendered their agricultural lands to the then Government

under the AP CRDA Act for the purpose of establishing a capital

city for the newly carved out State of Andhra Pradesh under the

A.P. Reorganisation Act, 2014. It is not in dispute that the

present Government has abolished the said AP CRDA Act and

brought into existence a new enactment in its place to have three

capitals for the State of Andhra Pradesh. The farmers opposed the

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

said decision of the present Government and they have also

challenged the abolition of the A.P. CRDA Act and introducing the

new enactment in its place in this Court by way of filing various

Writ Petitions. The said Writ Petitions are also allowed by this

Court and this Court has given certain directions to the

Government to develop the capital area by using the lands that

are surrendered by the farmers. The petitioners therein have also

filed various applications before this Court for implementing the

said directions of the Court being aggrieved by the inaction of the

Government in implementing the directions given by this Court.

They are all now pending adjudication before this Court.

14. Whileso, the petitioners intend to have Maha Padayatra to

take out a public procession from Amaravati to Arasavalli to air

their voice and to ventilate their grievance in this regard. As

noticed supra, they have also submitted a written request to the

2nd respondent Director General of Police on 27.08.2022 to permit

them to take out the procession by conducting Maha Padayatra

from Amaravati to Arasavalli from 12.09.2022 to 11.11.2022. The

said request was rejected by the impugned order, dated

08.09.2022, by the 2nd respondent Director General of Police. The

request was mainly rejected on the ground that earlier when the

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

police have permitted the 1st petitioner Trust to conduct Maha

Padayatra from Amaravati to Tirupati, as per the directions of this

Court given in a Writ Petition filed by the 1st petitioner Trust by

imposing reasonable conditions and restrictions, that the

members of the 1st petitioner Trust have violated the said

conditions and directions given both by this Court and also by the

police in the order permitting them to conduct Maha Padayatra

and law and order problem arose on account of the said violation

of directions committed by the members of the 1st petitioner Trust

and about 71 criminal cases were registered against them at that

time. The other ground on which the permission was rejected by

the impugned order is that there are cross section of people, who

belong to the Visakhapatnam Region, who are favouring the

decision of the Government to have the executive capital at

Visakhapatnam, and as the members of the 1st petitioner Trust

and the farmers are now passing through the said Visakhapatnam

District, that there is a possibility of law and order problem to take

place. The permission was also rejected on other various grounds,

which are set out in the impugned order.

15. The grounds, which are enumerated in the impugned order,

to reject permission to the members of the 1st petitioner Trust to

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

take out a procession and conduct Maha Padayatra as per the

route map and schedule submitted to him are, undoubtedly,

legally unsustainable. The right to assemble peacefully and to

move from one place to any part of the country by taking a

procession to air the voice of the members of the 1 st petitioner

Trust and the farmers to ventilate their grievance is the

fundamental right of the members of the 1st petitioner Trust and

the farmers as citizens of this country guaranteed under Articles

19(1)(a), 19(1)(b) and (d) of the Constitution of India.

16. In fact, the legal position in this regard is not res integra and

the same has been well-settled. The Apex Court way back in the

year 1961 itself, in the case of Babulal Parate v. State of

Maharashtra1 held as follows.

"The right of citizens to take out processions or to hold public meetings flows from the right in Article 19(1)(b) to assemble peaceably and without arms and the right to move anywhere in the territory of India."

17. In the case of Kameshwar Prasad v. State of Bihar2, the

Apex Court held that right to protest is a fundamental right and

the State must aid the right to assembly of the citizens. In the

1 1961 (3) SCR 423 2 (1962) Supp 3 SCR 369

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

case of Himat Lal K. Shah v. Commissioner of Police,

Ahmedabad3, the Apex Court held that the State cannot by law

abridge or take away the right of assembly by prohibiting

assembly on every public street or public place. The State can

only make regulations in aid of the right of assembly of each

citizen and can only impose reasonable restrictions in the interest

of public order.

18. In the case of Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan v. Union

of India4 the Apex Court held that holding peaceful demonstration

by the citizens of the country in order to air their grievances and

to ensure that these grievances are heard in the relevant quarters,

is its fundamental right. This right is specifically enshrined under

Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b) of the Constitution of India. Article

19(1)(a) confers a very valuable right on the citizens, namely, right

of free speech. Likewise, Article 19(1)(b) of the Constitution of

India gives right to assemble peacefully and without arms.

19. Therefore, together, both these rights ensure that the people

of this country have right to assemble peacefully and protest

against any of the actions or the decisions taken by the

3 (1973) 1 SCC 227 4 AIR 2018 SC 3476 = 2018 (10) SCJ 685

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

Government or other governmental authorities which are not to

their liking.

20. The aforesaid legal position enunciated in the judgments

rendered by the Apex Court also make the legal position clear that

the legitimate dissent is a distinguishable feature of any

democracy. So, when the members of the 1st petitioner Trust and

the farmers, who are aggrieved by certain decisions that are taken

by the present Government and the governmental authorities and

when they are fighting the legal battle and also got relief in the

Writ Petitions that are filed by them and when their present

grievance is that the directions in the said Writ Petitions are not

being implemented by the present Government, in order to

ventilate their grievance and to air their voice and to peacefully

protest against the said action of the Government and the decision

of the Government, the members of the 1st petitioner Trust and

the farmers got fundamental right guaranteed under the aforesaid

Articles to have a peaceful protest by conducting Maha Padayatra

and take out a procession peacefully.

21. The Apex Court also in the above referred judgments held

that a particular cause which, in the first instance, may appear to

be insignificant or irrelevant may gain momentum and

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

acceptability when it is duly voiced and debated and that is the

reason that this Court has always protected the valuable right of

peaceful and orderly demonstrations and protests.

22. The above view expressed by the Apex Court is apt in the

present context to consider. In the instant case also, as already

noticed supra, the petitioners intend to air their voice to ventilate

their grievances openly and publicly as it is their fundamental

right guaranteed under Articles 19(1)(a), 19(1)(b) and 19(1)(d) of

the Constitution of India. So, they got every right to lead

procession as part of their agitation or protest to ventilate their

grievance. However, they have to carry on their procession

peacefully and they should not resort to any violence during the

process of the Maha Padayatra. Therefore, by imposing reasonable

restrictions and conditions, it is always open to the police to

permit the members of the 1st petitioner Trust who are

undoubtedly citizens of the country to take out a procession by

conducting Maha Padayatra as per the schedule given by them

and the route map submitted by them, by imposing reasonable

restrictions and conditions.

23. Considering the aforesaid law laid down by the Apex Court

in all the above referred judgments, this Court also, when the

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

petitioners approached this Court in W.P.No.25154 of 2021

seeking permission to conduct Padayatra from Amaravati to

Tirupati, permitted the petitioners to conduct Padayatra and take

out procession by imposing certain reasonable conditions.

Therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the

above referred judgments and also in view of the judgment of this

Court, earlier passed in W.P.No.25154 of 2021, the petitioners are

entitled to permission to take out peaceful procession by

conducting Maha Padayatra from 12.09.2022 to 11.11.2022 from

Amaravati to Arasavalli as per the route map and schedule

submitted by them to the 2nd respondent Director General of

Police and to the respondents 3 to 18 Superintendents of Police of

various districts.

24) The contention of the respondent police officials that if

permission is accorded to the 1st petitioner Trust and the farmers

to conduct Maha Padayatra and to take out procession, that it

may lead to law and order problem is not at all tenable. There is

also no justification on the part of the 2nd respondent Director

General of Police, State of Andhra Pradesh, in rejecting the

permission to the 1st petitioner Trust to conduct the said Maha

Padayatra and to take out procession on the ground that there is

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

possibility of law and order problem to take place during the said

process. The respondent police officials cannot reject permission

on some imaginary apprehensions that the procession may lead to

law and order problem. Even if there is any possibility of law and

order problem to take place, it is the duty of the police to control

the said situation and to maintain law and order. They cannot

usurp the fundamental rights of the citizens on imaginary

apprehensions and grounds that there may be a possibility of law

and order problem to take place, if any such permission is given.

The respondent police officials cannot shun their responsibility to

control law and order situation, which is apprehended, by

rejecting permission to the 1st petitioner Trust and thereby usurp

their fundamental rights.

25) In fact, in one of the judgments cited supra, the Apex Court

also held that police cannot reject permissions to take out

procession or to assemble peacefully to ventilate grievance of the

citizens on the ground of there is possibility of law and order

problem to take place and held that it is the duty of the police to

control the said law and order situation and take adequate steps

to see that no such law and order problem arises. Therefore, the

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

said ground and also the other grounds on which the permission

was rejected by the impugned order are not legally sustainable.

26) There are also numerous instances in the State of Andhra

Pradesh where leaders of various political parties have earlier

conducted Padayatras as part of their political activities. Police

have also granted permissions to them to conduct Padayatras.

So, when the farmers, who are claiming to be victims in the given

facts and circumstances of the case, intend to conduct Maha

Padayatra and procession to air their voice and to ventilate their

grievance in this regard, there is absolutely no justification on the

part of the 2nd respondent Director General of Police in rejecting

permission to the 1st petitioner Trust by the impugned order.

27. Resultantly, in the said facts and circumstances of the case,

the Writ Petition is allowed declaring the impugned order of the

2nd respondent Director General of Police rejecting the permission

to the petitioners to conduct Maha Padayatra to take out a public

procession, as illegal and legally unsustainable. The 2nd

respondent Director General of Police is directed to accord

permission to the 1st petitioner Trust and to its members and

farmers to conduct Maha Padayatra and to take out public

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

procession from 12.09.2022 to 11.11.2022 from Amaravati to

Arasavalli, as per the route map and schedule submitted by them.

28. However, the 1st petitioner Trust is permitted to take out the

said procession only with 600 (six hundred) people, who shall be

the farmers. The 1st petitioner Trust shall furnish the names and

details of the said 600 persons, who would be participating in the

said public procession in Maha Padayatra to the 2nd respondent

Director General of Police by 5.00 P.M. today.

29. The 1st petitioner Trust shall take out the said public

procession in Maha Padayatra peacefully without resorting to any

acts of violence. They should not indulge in any illegal acts. They

should not make any comments or use any abusive language

against the authorities, who are at the helm of affairs of the State.

The 1st petitioner Trust shall not allow any other person to

participate in the procession on their way to Arasavalli. However,

other persons are at liberty to express their solidarity to the

farmers in a peaceful manner on their way to Arasavalli.

30. The 2nd respondent Director General of Police shall pass and

issue order accordingly granting permission to the 1st petitioner

Trust to conduct Maha Padayatra and to take out public

procession from 12.09.2022 to 11.11.2022 as per the route map

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

and the schedule submitted by them by imposing reasonable

restrictions and conditions by 6.00 P.M. today i.e. 09.09.2022.

31. The 1st petitioner Trust shall conduct the said Maha

Padayatra only from 8.00 A.M. to 6.00 P.M. from 12.09.2022 till

11.11.2022. The 1st petitioner Trust are permitted to exhibit Sri

Venkateswara Swamy idol in front of the procession and also to

carry on the vehicle, L.E.D. screen and the bio-toilets for the use

of the participants of the procession. The 1st petitioner Trust is

permitted to use hand mike sets during their procession. But,

they should not hold any public meetings on their way from

Amaravati to Arasavalli. The petitioners shall scrupulously comply

with the said directions of this Court, as stated supra.

32. In case the members of the 1st petitioner Trust violate the

conditions imposed, the respondent police officials are at liberty to

proceed against them according to law by following due process of

law. However, if the respondent police officials intend to cancel

the permission or licence that is granted to the petitioners, the

respondent police officials have to approach this Court by way of

filing an application setting forth the reasons to cancel the

permission or licence. They should not resort to unilateral

cancellation of the permission or the licence.

CMR, J.

W.P.No.28377 of 2022

33. The learned Government Pleader for Home is directed to

inform the 2nd respondent Director General of Police about the

above order passed by this Court and the directions given by this

Court to enable him to pass an order permitting the petitioners to

conduct Maha Padayatra and the public procession, by 6.00 P.M.

today.

34. There shall be no order as to costs.

The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand

closed.

________________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY Date:09.09.2022.

Note:

Issue C.C. today.

B/O cs