Allowed

Immadi Pitchamma v. A.P. State Waqf Board

Telangana HC5 Sept 2013WP/26053/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a writ petition challenging eviction orders passed by the A.P. State Wakf Board under Section 54(3) of the Wakf Act, 1995. The Court held that the impugned order was invalid as it failed to disclose reasons for its satisfaction regarding the property status and did not address the petitioner's submitted explanation. The proceedings were set aside, and the matter was remitted to t

What did the court decide?

Proceedings dated 05.12.2012 set aside; matter remitted to the Wakf Board to pass reasoned orders considering the petitioner's explanation after affording an opportunity of hearing.

Immadi Pitchamma Vs A.P. State Waqf Board — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.26053 of 2013

¶3

Date: September 05, 2013

¶4

Between: Immadi Pitchamma … Petitioner

¶5

And

¶6

A.P. State Wakf Board, Represented by its Chief Executive Officer, A.P. Haj House, Hyderabad. … Respondent

¶7

¶8

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶9

WRIT PETITION No.26053 of 2013

¶10

O R D E R:

¶11

The petitioner is aggrieved by the proceedings dated 05.12.2012 issued by the A.P. State Wakf Board in exercise of powers conferred under Section 54 (3) of the Wakf Act, 1995 (for brevity ‘the Act of 1995’).

¶12

2. Admittedly, a show cause notice dated 31.032012 was issued to the petitioner under Section 54 (1) of the Act of 1995. She submitted her explanation thereto relying on documentary evidence in proof of her possession over the alleged Wakf property. By the impugned proceedings dated 05.12.2012, the Wakf Board issued eviction orders against the petitioner requiring her to vacate the premises in her possession. Insofar as the consideration of the petitioner’s explanation is concerned the order baldly states as follows:

¶13

“In the reference cited, this office has issued a

¶14

Show Cause Notice U/sec.54(1) of the Wakf Act, 1995, to her to show cause as to why an order to remove the encroachment should not be made U/sec.54 (3) of the Wakf Act 1995, with her explanation to reach this office within (15) days from the date of receipt of the notice along with documentary evidence if any, failing which it will be deemed that she has no explanation to offer and further action will be taken as per law. The above notice was served on the individual and she has submitted her explanation, which has been found not convincing.”

¶15

3. Section 54 (3) of the Act of 1995 requires the Chief Executive Officer of the Wakf Board to satisfy himself that the property in question is a Wakf property and there has been an encroachment over the same. Such satisfaction must necessarily be reflected in the final order passed by him. It is pertinent to note that under Section 54 (4) of the Act of 1995, the party aggrieved by the order passed by the Chief Executive Officer of the Wakf Board is entitled to assail the same before the Wakf Tribunal. This would necessarily mean that the order passed by the Chief Executive Officer of the Wakf Board must disclose the reasons for the satisfaction underlying the conclusion as to the status of the property as well as the encroachment thereon. Further, the principles of natural justice mandate that an authority passing an order adverse to the interest of an individual must necessarily disclose the reasons therefor. On all counts, the impugned proceedings dated 05.12.2012 fail to fulfil the aforestated requirements.

¶16

4. The proceedings dated 05.12.2012 passed by the Chief Executive Officer, A.P. State Wakf Board, against the petitioner are therefore liable to be set aside on the short ground that they do not disclose the reasons underlying the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer of the Wakf Board and as to why he rejected the explanation

¶17

submitted by the petitioner.

¶18

5. The writ petition is accordingly allowed setting aside the proceedings dated 05.12.2012 passed by the Chief Executive Officer of the A.P. State Wakf Board against the petitioner. The matter is remitted to the Wakf Board for consideration afresh and for passing reasoned orders after duly considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner. The petitioner shall be afforded an opportunity of hearing during this exercise. W.P.M.P. No.32184 of 2013 shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as to costs.

¶19

___________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J.

¶20

Date: September 05, 2013. BSB

¶21

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶22

WRIT PETITION No.26053 of 2013

¶23

Date: September 05, 2013

¶24

BSB

Immadi Pitchamma v. A.P. State Waqf Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Immadi Pitchamma v. A.P. State Waqf Board

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

Bathula Bhadraiah Vs State of A.P.

Ardula Baji, S/o.Muthaiah, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal

Gaddala Naga Purushothama Rao, Vs The Sub Registrar

T. Nagamma Vs The Govt. of a.P., Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Moghal Hathala Baig, S/o Ismail Baig, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Smt. C. Surekha, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal