The court dismissed a writ appeal against the rejection of a petitioner's claim for lease of Wakf property. The court held no legally enforceable right exists to insist on lease without public auction.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI B.PRAKASH RAO
AND
THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI V.SURI APPA RAO
WRIT APPEAL NO.779 OF 2010
JUDGMENT:
Heard Sri Kowturu Vinaya Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Mir Masood Khan, learned Standing Counsel for the Wakf Board-first respondent and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents 2 and 3. At their request, the Writ Appeal itself is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission.
The appellant is the unsuccessful petitioner in W.P.No.24476 of 2010, where she sought to assail declaration of the memo dated 16.09.2010 issued by the first respondent as arbitrary and illegal and to set aside the same and further sought a direction to the first respondent to allot the land admeasuring Ac.1.03 gts in survey No.436 attached to Dargah Hazratg Ganj-E-Shaheed (Rh) Khamam in her favour on lease. The learned Single Judge rejected her request on the ground that she has no legally enforceable right to insist that the property belonging to a registered Wakf should be given to her on lease.
Be that as it may, the fact remains that the appellant is specifically seeking enforcement of a substantial right in respect of lease of the above mentioned property. Necessarily, it follows the question of any such property to be given to any individual does not arise unless and until the situation occurs in the normal course of public auction. It is now well settled that the normal way of disposal of properties held by the State or any other public institution shall be by way of auction and only in exceptional circumstances such a
procedure can be dispensed with. In view of the same, we do not find any merits and the Writ Appeal is liable to be dismissed. However, having regard to the fact that in the event if the respondents takes the course of public auction, it is needless to mention that the appellant could as well participate in the said auction. Though it has been pointed out in the impugned memo that the rent is not reasonable and the action being taken to call for interested parties to come forward with higher rent in the interest of the Wakf administration, such procedure is also not contemplated under the law except by taking recourse of public auction.
Subject to the above, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. No costs.
____________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, HACJ)
__________________ (V.SURI APPA RAO, J)
15th November 2010 RRB
Note: CC by one week B/O RRB
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appellant's request for lease of Wakf property mentioned in the impugned memo has legal enforceability.
Appellant
Wakf Board
Respondents 2 and 3
B. Prakash Rao
V. Suri Appa Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
