Allowed

Smt. Shameem Sultana, v. The District Collector

Telangana HC28 Oct 2013WP/4523/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court through a writ petition held that a letter directing demolition of constructions when the matter is sub judice before the Wakf Tribunal cannot be sustained. The letter was set aside, but the petitioner was restrained from raising further constructions during the interim order's validity.

What did the court decide?

The impugned letter dated 06.02.2013 was set aside. The petitioner is restrained from raising any further construction while the Wakf Tribunal's order remains in force.

Smt. Shameem Sultana, Vs The District Collector — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.4523 of 2013

¶2

Date: 28.10.2013

¶3

Between:

¶4

Smt.Shameem Sultana

¶5

.. Petitioner

¶6

and

¶7

The District Collector, Medak and others

¶8

.. Respondents

¶9

Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri O.Manoher Reddy

¶10

Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3: Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue

¶11

Counsel for respondent No.4: ---

¶12

Counsel for respondent No.5: Sri Mir Masood Khan, standing counsel for Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board

¶13

Counsel for respondent No.6: Sri Mehdi Husain

¶14

ORDER:

¶15

This writ petition is filed feeling aggrieved by the letter in F.No.5/Wakf/MDK/2013 dated 06.02.2013 of respondent No.2 addressed to respondent No.4, whereunder he has requested the latter to demolish the purported illegal constructions raised by the petitioner in survey No.521/517 of Gajwel Village and Mandal.

¶16

At the hearing, it is not disputed by the learned counsel for the parties that respondent No.6 filed O.S.No.69 of 2012 before the Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Tribunal for recovery of possession of the aforementioned property from the petitioner. He also filed I.A.No.630 of 2012 in the said suit for grant of an ad interim injunction/temporary injunction restraining the petitioner herein, her husband and the persons claiming through her from making further constructions. The Wakf Tribunal has granted the ad interim injunction/temporary injunction accordingly on 04.07.2012. While the said order is in force and the suit is pending, respondent No.2 issued the impugned letter.

¶17

In my opinion, when the matter is sub judice, there was no justification for respondent No.2 to address the impugned letter. When there is already an interim order against the petitioner, if she makes further construction that will be at her peril and both respondent Nos. 5 and 6 would bring the same to the notice of the Wakf Tribunal and seek appropriate relief against the petitioner with regard to further construction.

¶18

Therefore, in my opinion, the impugned letter dated 06.02.2013 addressed by respondent No.2 cannot be sustained in law and the same is accordingly set aside. However, in the light of the order passed by the Wakf Tribunal that the petitioner shall not raise further construction, she is restrained from raising any further construction so long as the order passed by the Wakf Tribunal remains in force.

¶19

The Writ Petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.

¶20

As a sequel to allowing the writ petition, interim order dated

¶21

14.02.2013 is vacated and W.P.M.P.No.5646 of 2013 filed by the petitioner for interim relief shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

¶22

_____________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J

¶23

28^th October, 2013 GHN

Smt. Shameem Sultana, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Shameem Sultana, v. The District Collector

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

Damacherla Purnanand , Purnaiah, Vs Damacherla Srujana

Smt. Junjuru Varalakshmi, Vs The District Collect

Doppalapudi Vajramma Vs The Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh

Mr. Mohd. Zaheer Ahmed, S/o. Mr. Fathe Mohammed Vs a. P. State Wakf Board

Yaddula Hanumantha Reddy Vs Y Narasimha Reddy

Bandi Brahmaiah, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh