What a coincidence? Two major historic judgments on one single day at two different places. 
On April 30, 2025, in New Deli, the Supreme Court of India issued a landmark judgment that said unauthorized constructions cannot be legitimized merely due to administrative delays, passage of time, or monetary investments, and issued a slew of directions to curb illegal constructions.
ON April 30, in Amaravati, Andhra Pradesh, the High Court stated that “Only a person belonging to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe can invoke the provisions of SC, ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.”  A Christian cannot be considered a member of SC/ST tribe. There is no caste system in Christianity.
1.    Supreme Court of India on unauthorized constructions.
•    Unauthorised constructions must be demolished
•    Regularization of buildings should not be considered
•    Law should not rescue those who flout the rule of law
•    Steps to be taken if any deviation/violation is brought to authorities.
“We are of the opinion that construction(s) put up in violation of or deviation from the building plan approved by the local authority and the constructions which are audaciously put up without any building planning approval, cannot be encouraged. Each and every construction must be made scrupulously following and strictly adhering to the rules," it said
"We must adopt a strict approach while dealing with cases of illegal construction and should not readily entertain regularisation of buildings erected without requisite permission from the competent authority. The need for maintaining such a firm stance emanates not only from inviolable duty cast upon the Courts to uphold the rule of law, rather such judicial restraint gains more force in order to facilitate the well-being of all concerned.”, the court added.
"Unauthorised constructions, apart from posing a threat to the life of the occupants and the citizens living nearby, also have an effect on resources like electricity, groundwater and access to roads, which are primarily designed to be made available in orderly development and authorised activities,” it said.
“A person who has no regards for the law cannot be permitted to pray for regularisation after putting up unauthorised construction of two floors. This has something to do with the rule of law. Unauthorised construction has to be demolished.”
"Even after issuance of completion certificate, deviation/violation if any contrary to the planning permission brought to the notice of the authority immediate steps be taken by the said authority concerned, in accordance with law, against the builder/owner/occupant,” it said.

2.    High Court of Andhra Pradesh on disqualification of Christians to file Atrocities Act against Hindus.
•    Case about a converted pastor qualification to file Atrocities Act against Hindus
•    Court ruled pastor no longer retained Scheduled Caste status
•    Caste system does not exist in Christianity
•    The court cited 1950 order which specifies restrictions on SC status
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that members of Scheduled Castes (SC) who convert to Christianity forfeit their SC status and, as a result, the benefits under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Handed down by Justice N Harinath, the verdict has ignited an important debate not just on constitutional provisions but also on the integrity of affirmative action and social justice mechanisms in India.
Chintada Anand, a pastor from Guntur district, who had filed a complaint under the SC/ST Act against one Akkala Ramireddy. Anand, who has been a practicing pastor for over a decade, alleged that Ramireddy and others had discriminated against him based on caste. 
“The SC/ST Act is intended to protect communities facing caste discrimination. Its provisions do not extend to those who have adopted other faiths,” the court observed.
“… this Court is of the considered view that the registration of crime under the provisions of SC ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is illegal. It is also held that filing of charge sheet inspite of the categorical statements of the listed witnesses specifically stating that the 2nd respondent is working as a Pastor for the last 10 years, the police could not have laid a charge sheet charging the petitioners for alleged offence under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va), SC ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.”
Consequently, the Court ordered, “This Court is of the considered view that a false complaint is filed and no purpose would be served if the petitioners are relegated to the trial Court and to undergo the rigmarole of trial…criminal petition is allowed and Spl.SC.No.36 of 2021 on the file of IV Additional District and Sessions Judge – Cum – SC, ST Court, Guntur is hereby quashed.”
Your donations are appreciated.
By Zelle: ghhfusaorg@gmail.com
PayPal: savetemples.org
By Check: Or you can send a check payable to GHHF, 14726 Harmony Lane, Frisco, TX 75035.
It is tax-deductible.
By Rupees: call 601-918-7111; +91 83096 43979