Syed Abdul Sattar Hazi Vs the State of Ap

¶1

APHC010242782025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 14776 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

SYED ABDUL SATTAR HAZI, S/o S.A.Khadar, aged about 59 years, occupation: Tax Consultant, a resident of 4-71/1-1, MRO Office Road Bethamcherla, Nandyal District.

¶9

...Petitioner

¶10

AND

¶11

THE STATE OF AP, rep by its Special Secretary, Minorities Welfare Department, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District.

¶12

The Andhra Pradesh Waqf Board, rep by its Chief Executive Officer, Imdad Ghar, Vijayawada.

¶13

The Chief Executive Officer, the Andhra Pradesh Waqf Board, Imdad Ghar, Vijayawada.

¶14

Mulla Noor Ahamed, S/o Mulla Mahammad Ibraheem, Aged 57 years, R/o H.No.8-11, Jenda Peta, Bethamcherla, Nandyal District.

¶15

...Respondents

¶16

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 declare the Proceeding F.No.B3/53/KNL/2002 dated 10/04/2025 issued by the respondent No.3 in appointing respondent No.4 as Mathavalli of Jamia Masjid, Bethamcherla, Nandyal District, is arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, and also a violation of the Principles of natural justice and articles 14

¶17

2

¶18

and 15 of the Constitution of India, consequently set aside the proceeding F.No.B3/53/KNL/2002 dated 10.04.2025 of the respondent No. 3 and to pass such other orders.

¶19

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶20

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 to stay all further proceedings in terms of the proceeding F.No.B3/53/KNL/2002 dated 10.04.2025 of the respondent No.3, consequently, direct respondent No.4 not to be involved in the management of the Jamia Masjid, Bethamcherla, Nandyal District pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass such other orders.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: BASHEER AHMED

¶22

Counsel for the Respondents: ANCHA PANDURANGA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE

¶23

Counsel for the Respondents: SHAIK KHAJA BASHA

¶24

The Court made the following:

¶25

3

¶26

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.14776 of 2025

¶27

ORDER:-

¶28

The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief/s:

¶29

“…to declare the Proceeding F.No.B3/53/KNL/2002 dated 10/04/2025 issued by the respondent No.3 in appointing respondent No.4 as Muthavalli of Jamia Masjid, Bethamcherla, Nandyal District, is arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, and also a violation of the Principles of natural justice and articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India, consequently set aside the proceeding F.No.B3/53/KNL/2002 dated 10.04.2025 of the respondent No. 3 and to pass such other orders.”

¶30

Heard Sri Basheer Ahmed, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Social Welfare, Sri Shaik Khaja Basha, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 and Sri Ancha Panduranga Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.4.

¶31

The Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that when the Wakf Board acted arbitrarily in appointing the 4^th respondent as temporary muttawalli, this Court can exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India despite the petitioner has an alternative remedy of filing an OA (Original Application) before the Wakf Tribunal under Section 83 (2) of the Wakf Act, 1995.

¶32

4

¶33

The learned counsel for the 4^th respondent would submit that the 4^th respondent has filed Original Application (OA) before the Wakf Tribunal under Section 83 (2) of the Wakf Act, 1995 assailing the report dated 17.06.2020 submitted by S.A. Mansoor, Assistant Secretary/Enquiry Officer, which report spells out some irregularities that has been committed by the 4^th respondent and the said OA is yet to be numbered. It is known law mere filing an OA before Wakf Tribunal did not amount to a stay, unless the proceedings has been suspended.

¶34

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the 2^nd respondent that a paper publication was issued inviting objections under Section 54 of the Wakf Act following the appointment of an Enquiry Officer regarding the appointment of 4^th respondent as temporary muttawalli under Section 63 of the Wakf Act. The Enquiry Officer has recommended the name of the 4^th respondent to be appointed as muttawalli of Jamia Masjid Wakf Institution, pursuant to the recommendation by the Enquiry Officer the 4^th respondent has been appointed as temporary muttawalli and it is further stated that there is no deviation in the procedure in appointing the 4^th respondent as temporary muttawalli, and it is emphasized that the writ petitioner has not filed any objection under Section 54 of the Act either before the Enquiry Officer or Wakf Board hence it stated that the petitioner has no locus to file the writ petition.

¶35

5

¶36

Indeed the Enquiry Officer was appointed by the Wakf Board to submit a report against the 4^th respondent. The enquiry report dated 10.04.2025 does not indicate that any objections were received by the Enquiry Officer against the 4^th respondent (temporary mutawalli). Instead the enquiry has submitted an enquiry report against the existing muttawalli of the stating that the said muttawalli has acted against the interest of the Wakf Institution. Interestingly, the Enquiry Officer has recommended the 4^th respondent name to be appointed as temporary muttawalli for the Jamia Masjid Bethemcherla Wakf Institution. Based on the said report the Board has appointed the 4^th respondent as temporary muttawalli for the Jamia Masjid Bethemcherla Wakf Institution under Section 63 of the Wakf Acct 1995, without proper application of mind.

¶37

The report dated 17.06.2020 submitted by S.A. Mansoor, Assistant Secretary/Enquiry Officer, spells out some irregularities against 4^th respondent (temporary muttawalli). Nevertheless, the irregularities that has been pointed out by the enquiry officer, the Board proceeded to appoint the 4^th respondent as temporary muttawalli for Jamia Masjid Bethemcherla Wakf Institute. Such act of the Board is viewed as arbitrary.

¶38

Hence under the aforesaid circumstances this court directs the writ petitioner to submit an objection regarding the appointment of the 4^th respondent as temporary muttawalli for Jamia Masjid Bethemcherla

¶39

6

¶40

Wakf Institution to the 2^nd respondent Wakf Board within a period of two weeks from date of receipt of the order. Upon submitting such objection the Wakf Board shall pass an order strictly in accordance with law and communicate such decision to the petitioner within a period of 4 weeks from the date of objection filed. Until such time the appointment of the 4^th respondent as temporary muttawalli will be held under abeyance. During this period the Inspector Auditor shall manage the affairs of the Jamia Masjid Bethemcherla Wakf Institution.

¶41