Dismissed

Dargah Hz.Shaik Sha Vali and Haz. Sha Sha Vali (Rh) v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC6 Dec 2018WA/1617/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed this writ appeal challenging proceedings under the Wakf Act, 1995. It held the writ court lacked jurisdiction and the matter fell within the exclusive sphere of the Wakf Tribunal. The appeal is dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal against the impugned orders under Section 83 of the Wakf Act, 1995 is dismissed.

Dargah Hz.Shaik Sha Vali and Haz. Sha Sha Vali… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT

¶2

WRIT APPEAL No.1617 OF 2018

¶3

JUDGMENT: ( Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice S.V.Bhatt)

¶4

Heard Mr.P.Venugopal, learned senior counsel holding for Mr.S.M.Subhani for appellant and Mr.Arifullah for respondents.

¶5

The writ petitioner is the appellant. The appellant challenged proceedings F. No. 05/ M/ KNL/ 2015/ Z IV dated 26-04-2016 and also the proceedings F. No. 05/ M/ KNL/ 2015/ Z.IV/ Supply dated 24-09-2018, a s illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the Wakf Act,1995 (for short ‘the Act’). The operative portion of the order under appeal grants liberty to appellant to avail the remedy against these impugned orders before the A.P. Wakf Tribunal constituted under Section 83 of the Act.

¶6

After appreciating the nature of controversy between parties and the scope of enquiry, we could not be persuaded by the appellant to take a different view. The learned Single Judge has ultimately relegated the petitioner to statutory remedy i.e., to the comprehensive jurisdiction of the Wakf Tribunal in terms of the Act. Having seen that there is no legal infirmity or jurisdictional error committed in the order under appeal, the writ appeal fails and is dismissed. However, we clarify that the appellant approaches the Wakf Tribunal in any lawfully instituted proceedings and in such proceedings, the Tribunal may consider an application filed for interim relief, in accordance with law.

¶7

¶8

The learned standing counsel for the Wakf Board submits that appointment of Executive Officer would not result in removal of Muthavalli and, therefore, no notice is required for such pre-decisional notice to be given to Muthavalli. It is further submitted by the learned standing counsel that an enquiry has been instituted by the Wakf Board as against Muthavalli. We record these submissions.

¶9

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending

¶10

stand closed. No order as to costs.

¶11

______________________
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, CJ

S.V.BHATT, J
Date:06.12.2018
Stp

Dargah Hz.Shaik Sha Vali and Haz. Sha Sha Vali (Rh) v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dargah Hz.Shaik Sha Vali and Haz. Sha Sha Vali (Rh) v. State of Andhra Pradesh

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

Rudravaram Venugopal Vs The Election Commission of India

Bollaram Yellaiah Vs The Election Commission of India

N Choultry Vs Prl.Secretary ( Revenue) and 2 Others

The District Collector Vs Nadakudithi Chandralankaiah

M/S. Sai Ram Constructions Vs The State of Telangana

J.Chiranjeevi Babu Vs The Bar Council of India