Disposed

Vattikuti Rama Rao v. Apswb,Scy,Ch.Ex.Officer,Hyd,& 3

Andhra Pradesh HC21 Nov 2024WP/21193/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition at the admission stage, directing the parties to resolve their dispute regarding alleged wakf property encroachment before the statutory Waqf Tribunal where an application was pending, and restrained interference with possession pending the Tribunal's decision.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed; parties directed to adjudicate dispute before Waqf Tribunal; respondents restrained from interfering with possession till further orders.

Vattikuti Rama Rao Vs Apswb,Scy,Ch.Ex.Officer,Hyd,& 3 — Land Acquisition | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :; AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF NOVEMBER /I TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR (

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 21193 OF 2014

¶5

Between:

¶6

Vattikuti Rama Rao, S/o. Late Venkata Rao, Aged 70 years, Occ; Cultivation, R/o. Vemuluru Village, Kovvur Mandal, West Godavari District. ...PETITIONER AND

¶7

Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board, Rep.by its Secretary-cum-Chi^ef Executive Officer, Opp: Public Gardens, Hyderabad.

¶8

The Secretary-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board, Opp; Public Gardens, Hyderabad.

¶9

State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by District Collector, West Godavari District at Eluru.

¶10

The Tahsildar, Kovvur Mandal, West Godavari District

¶11

...RESPONDENTS

¶12

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 to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF CERTIORARI calling for entire records connected to proceedings No. F.No.23/PROT/WG/2012-82, dated 23.05.2014 issued by 2nd respondent, examine the same and set aside such order after declaring the same as illegal, irregular, irrational, without jurisdiction, violative of principles of natural justice and provisions of The Waqf Act, 1995 and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from

¶13

his land of Ac. 2.50 cents covered by survey number 268 of Pasivedala Revenue Village of Kovvur Mandal in West Godavari District.

¶14

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶15

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to receive Reply Affidavit on record by allowing the Leave Petition in the above Writ Petition.

¶16

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2014rWPMP. NO: 26575 OF 20141

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of order in proceedings No. F.No. 23/PROT/WG/2012-82, dated 23.05.2014 issued by 2nd respondent and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from his land of Ac. 2.50 cents covered by survey number 268 of Pasivedala Revenue Village of Kovvur Mandal in West Godavari District, pending disposal of the main writ petition.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent No.1: S ARIFULLAH (SC FOR AP WAQF

¶19

BOARD)

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI SHAIK KHAJA BASHA (SC FOR

¶21

AP STATE WAQF BOARD)

¶22

Counsel for the Respondents No.3,4: GP FOR REVENUE

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

[3329]

APHC010047332014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶28

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶29

FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶30

PRESENT

¶31

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶32

WRIT PETITION NO: 21193/2014

Between:

Vattikuti Rama Rao

...PETITIONER

AND

Apswb Scy Oh Ex Officer Hyd 3 and Others

¶38

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶39

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶40

1.NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA

¶41

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶42

1.GP FOR REVENUE (AP)

¶43

2.S ARIFULLAH (SC FOR AP WAQF BOARD)

¶44

3.SHAIKKHAJA BASHA

¶45

The Court made the following:

¶46

ORDER:-

¶47

The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226^{oftheConstitutionof} India, seeking the following relief;

¶48

to issue a writ order or direction more particularly^one in the nature of WRIT OF CERTIORARI calling for entire^records connected to proceedings No. F.No.23/PROT/WG/2012-82, dated 23.05.2014 issued by 2nd respondent, examine^thesame and set aside such order after declaring the same as illegal, irregular, irrational, without jurisdiction, violative^{ofprinciplesof} natural justice and provisions of the Waqf Act, 1995^andoffends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from his land of Ac. 2.50 cents covered^bysurvey number 268 of Pasivedala Revenue Village of Kovvur^Mandalin West Godavari District and pass...”

¶49

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order passed by the respondent No.2, dated 23.05.2014, is^{withoutjurisdictionand} contrary to the Section 54 (3) of Waqf Act, 1995. Section^{54(3)oftheWaqf} Act, contemplates that any alleged encroachment can^{onlyberemovedonby} way of making an application by the respondent No.2^{beforetheWakfTribunal.} Flowever, without adhering to the said procedure, the respondent No.2^straight away directed the eviction of the petitioner. Hence,^{thewritpetition.}

¶50

¶51

At the time of admission, after hearing both the^{counsel,thisCourtwas} pleased to pass an interim direction on 28.07.2014.^{Since,thenthepetitioner} has been in possession and enjoyment of the property. If the respondents still intend to evict the petitioner on the allegation of^{encroachmentoftheWakf}

¶52

'v-

¶53

property, the procedure contemplated under Section 54(3) of Waqf Act, 1995, must be adhered to.

¶54

The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submits that in the Section 54(3) of Waqf Act, 1995 is prescribes a mandatory procedure pursuant to which the respondent No.2 already submitted an application before the Waqf Tribunal seeking for the removal of encroachments from wakf property. But , so far neither such application nor notice has been served against petitioners same is pending or consideration. Therefore, in view of the submissions made by both the counsel and on perusal of the material on record without going into merits of the case, this Court inclined to disposes the writ petition at the admission stage directing both the parties to resolve their disputes by way of adjudication before the statutory Tribunal i.e., Wakf Tribunal, since the application under Section 54(3) is pending as stated supra. Hence, the respondents herein are restrained from interference of possession of the petitioners against the subject property till further orders of the Tribunal. Having regard to the submissions both the counsel, the petitioner is also at liberty to any additional developments or arguments before the Tribunal.

¶55

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶56

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ

¶57

petition shall stand closed.

¶58

¶59

//TRUE COPY//

¶60

SD/- K. KASiRAO ACHARi ASSiSTA^^EGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER

¶61

To,

¶62

The Secretary-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board, Opp; Public Gardens, Hyderabad.

¶63

The Secretary-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board, Opp: Public Gardens, Hyderabad.

¶64

L ^

¶65

The District Collector, State of Andhra Pradesh, West Godavari District at Eluru.

¶66

The Tahsildar, Kovvur Mandal, West Godavari District,

¶67

OneCCto SRI. NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA, Advocate

¶68

[OPUC]

¶69

One CC to SRI. S. ARIFULLAH (SC FOR AP WAQF BOARD)^Advocate

¶70

[OPUC]

¶71

One CC to SRI. SHAIK KHAJA BASRA, (SC FOR AP WAQF BOARD) Advocate [OPUC]

¶72

Two CCS to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶73

Three C.D.Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED:22/11/2024

ORDER

WP.No.21193 of 2014

of
o
.5 0 6 JAN 2C25
S^SPATCVV^ii^

¶80

DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

Vattikuti Rama Rao v. Apswb,Scy,Ch.Ex.Officer,Hyd,& 3

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vattikuti Rama Rao v. Apswb,Scy,Ch.Ex.Officer,Hyd,& 3

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Water Users Association Vs Sri Sasi Bhushan Kumar IAS

Master Penmetsa Murali Krishnam Raju, Vs The Government of India

Damacharla Anil Babu Vs The Government of India, rep. by its Secretary

D.Venugopal Rao Vs Sri Vikas Marmat, Ias.

M/s. Omkar Industries (Sc No.14221005722) Vs The Senior Accounts Officer, Operation Circle

Natti Ramana, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh