Allowed

Sri B.Damodar v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC7 Jan 2020WP/2328/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Landholders challenged notifications declaring disputed land waqf property. The court held that Section 40 did not authorise gazette publication and that the notifications violated statutory procedure and the Supreme Court's directions. It entertained the writ petitions despite the alternative remedy and set aside the gazette notifications, preliminary notification and rejection memo.

What did the court decide?

Gazette Notifications Nos.6 and 25, the preliminary notification and the memo rejecting objections were set aside.

Sri B.Damodar Vs State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

IUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY

¶5

WRIT PETITION Nos.19424 of 20'17 3140 3165 11048 11072 11375 & 41502 of 2018 and 2327 ,2328 & 13094 of 2019

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 19424 OF 2017

¶7

Between:

¶8

B.Damodar, S/o: Sri B.Chinnaiah, Aged:about 70 yrs., Occ:Business, R/o:44, Balamrai Society, Mahendrahills, East I/arrredpally, Secunderabad.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

Telangana State Wakf Board, represented by its Chief Executive Officer, Office at Haj House, Razzack Manzil, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶12

...RESPONDENT

¶13

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to rssue a Writ of lt/andamus or any other appropriate writ declaring that the notification of the respondent contained ln File No.23lL4 (a)/RR/2014, dated 13.04.2017 published in Deccan Chronicle News daily on 15.04.2017 by which the respondent is proceeding to declare the land admeasuring Ac.90-17 guntas in Sy.Nos.1 to I of Guttala Begumpet Village, Serilingampally, R.R. District as wakf property under Section 40 of the Waqf Act, 1995, is arbitrary, illegal and ultra vires to the provisions of the Act and violative of Article 14 and 300-4 of the Constitution of lndia and opposed to the Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondent to forbear from proceeding any further with the said notification and further direct the respondent not to interfere with the^possession and enjoyment of the petitioners over the subject land.

¶14

WPMP. NO: 23655 OF 2017

¶15

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^grant stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the notification of the respondent in File No.23lL4 (a)/RR/2014, dated 13.04.2017 published in Deccan Chronicle News daily on 15.04.2017 which relates to the land in Sy.Nos.1 to 9 admeasuring Ac.90.17 guntas situated at Guttala Begumpet Village, Serilingampally lr,4andal, Ranga Reddy District, pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. T.V. KALYAN SINGH

¶17

Counsel for the Respondents: SRI S.R. MAHAJIR

¶18

WRIT PETITION NO: 3140 OF 20'18 \

¶19

Between:

¶20

Pallavi Enclave Owners Welfare Association, ( society registered under A.P. Societies Act. Vide.F.egd.No.1235 of 1997), Represented by i's General Secretary, Sri. J.Ramakrishna Fiao, S/o. J.Chokka Rao, Aged 63 years, Occ. Business, R/o.12-593/35, Gaganmahal Colony, Domalguda, Hyderabad.

¶21

...PETITIONER

¶22

AND

¶23

1, State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary, l,4inc,rity Welfare, Government of Tr:langana, Telangana Secretrait, Hyderaba^j

¶24

1. Telangana State \A/akf Board, represented by its Chief Execrtiv,: Officer , Office at Haj House, Ra;:zackl\4anzil, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶25

...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia pr. ying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Cor rt nray be pleased to issue a Writ or Order or Direction more particularly one in tlre nature of Writ of It4andamus declaring that the rejection proceedings vide l,4,:mo F.No.21lL4 (a)/RRi 2016 dated^'16.(r'1 .2018 issued without .jurisdiction and lreyond the scope of Section-4O of Wakf A,rt by the 2nd Respondent to the pelitioner rejecting the objections filed by the []etitioner which have been passed pursrranl to a Notification dI. 13-4-2017 issued urder Section 40 of the Wakf Act 1995 as llle,lal, Arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-4 of the Constitution of lnd a, :rnd set aside the sa me.

¶26

lA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶27

Petition under Section^'1 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in supporl of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to rejection It4emo F No. 21l14 (a) iRR /2016 dated 16.0'1 .2018 issued wilhout jurisdiction and beyond the scope of Section -40 of Wakf Act by the 2nd Respondent to the petitioner which have been passerl pursuant to a Notification dated 13.0.,.201 7, issued under sectton 40 of the Wakf Act 1995 pending disposal of the Writ Pet tion. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. M. SRIKANTH

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE

¶29

Counsel for the ResporrdentNo.2: SRI S.R. MAHAJIR

¶30

WRIT PETITION NO:3165 OF 2018

¶31

Between:

¶32

V.Gandhi, S/o. V Krishnamurthy, Aged about years, Occ Agrricr lture R/o. Pedda Gonnur Krishna District Rep by GPA K Rama Krishna S/o. KSI'I lr/:rthy, Aged about yrs Occ Business R/o. Madhura Nagar, Hyderabad

¶33

...PETITIONER

¶34

AND

¶35

1 State of Telangana, Rep By its Principal Secretary, Monitory Wr:lfare Government of Terlangana Telangana secretariat Hyderabarl.

¶36

2 Telangana State {akf Board, Rep by its Chief Executive Of icer, Office at Haj House Razzack lrlanzil Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶37

.. RESPONDENTS

¶38

¶39

Petition under Article 226 oI lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF IVANDAMUS declaring that the rejection proceedings vide lr,4emo F No. 211L4 (a\ iRR/2016 dated 16.01.2018 issued by the 2nd respondent rejecting the objections filed by the petitioner which have been passed pursuant to a notification dated 13.04.2017 issued under section 40 of the Wakf Act 1995 which is contrary to the finding given by the Hon'ble High Court in WP No.26553/2003 and WA No.. 21512002 and batch up helding the title of the petitioner over the land in Sy No. 9 admeasuring Ac 1-00 Gts situated at Guttalabegumpet Serlingampally [tilandal Ranga Reddy as illegal arbitrary and violative of Articles 14,21 ,and 300-4 of the constitution of lndia and set aside the same.

¶40

lA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶41

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 direct the Respondents not to include the property of the petitioner in Sy No. I admeasuring Ac 1.00 Gts situated at Guttalabegumpet Serlingampally mandal Ranga Reddy District in the proposed notification to be issued by the respondents pursuant to the rejection of objections vide l,4emo F No. 21lL4 ( a) /RRi 2016 dated 16.01 .2018 issued by the 2nd respondent.

¶42

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. T.V. KALYAN SINGH

¶43

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE

¶44

Counsel for the RespondentNo.2: SRI S.R. MAHAJIR

¶45

WRIT PETITION NO:^'11048 OF 2018

¶46

Between:

¶47

Balamrai Cooperative Housing Society Ltd, having registered Office at Plot No.96. Dhanalaxmi Colony, lVahendra Hills, East Marredpally, Secunderabad represented by its President l.Raja Babu Sit) l.Rajesham, aged 50^years, Fyo Kakateeya Nagar, R.K.Puram, Neredmet, Secunderabad

¶48

..'ETIT,ONER

¶49

AND1. State of Telangana, represented by Principal Secretary, Minority Welfare, Telangana Secretariat, Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶50

Telangana State Wakf Board, Haj House, Opp. Public Gardens. Nampally, Hyderabad, reptd. by its Chief Executive Officer.

¶51

The Chief Executive Officer, Telangana State Wakf Board, Ha.j House. Opp. Public Gardens, Nampally. Hyderabad.

¶52

Alamgiri Masjid, Graveyard and Eidgah, Guttala Begumpet Village, Serlingampally N,4andal, Ranga Reddy District, represented by its lr/anaging Committee and President Mohd. Yousuf resident of H.No.8-4-369/1 , Sai Ram Nagar, Site lll, Borabanda, Hyderabad.

¶53

(R-4 is impleaded as per Court Order, dated 1^'1 .04.2018 in l.A.No.2 of 2018.)

¶54

..RESPONDENTS

¶55

¶56

Petition under Article 226 of the Conlstitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Cor rt nray be pleased to issue any appropriate V/rit, Order or direction, one more particr larlv in the nature of Writ of l\rlandamus or any other writ including or any combinatirn rrf writs declaring that the action of the rr..spondents in issuing the Gazette Notif caticn Nos.6 (File N o.21lL A(a)/RR/20 15) and 25 (File no.21l14(a)/RR/2016) dated 08-02-2018 and 2202-2018 respectively as arbitrary, illegal, without^jurisdiction and ultra-vires of the provisions of the Wakf l\ct, 1995 and consequently set aside the same and direct the respondents not to interrfere with the petitioners possession a rd enjoyment of the subject land.

¶57

lA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶58

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 pk,aserd to suspend the operation and affect ,rf the impugned Board Gazette Noti icalion No's.6 (File No21/LA(a)RR 2015) and 25 (File no.2'1lLA(a)/RR12016) dated 08.02-2012 and 2202-2018 respectively. declaring the lands in Sy. No.1 to 9 cf Guttala Begumpet village, Serilingampally l,4andal, RR District to be attached to Wakf Alamgiri [/osque mosque deposal of the^ttVrit petition.

¶59

lA NO: 3 OF 2018

¶60

Betwee n:

¶61

1 The Telangana Slate Wakf Board, Haj House, Opp. Public^(larcens. Nampally, Hyderabad, reptd by its Chief Executive Officer.

¶62

2 The Chief Executive Officer, Telangana State Wakf Board, tlaj House. Opp. Public Gardens. I'lampally. Hyderabad,

¶63

...Petitioner/Re^,spondent Nos.2 & 3

¶64

AND

¶65

1 Balamrai Cooperalive Housing Society Ltd, having registerel Otfrce at Plot No.96. Dhanalaxrri Colony, [Vlahendra Hills, East l\rlarredpally, Siecunderabad represented by its President l.Raja Babu Sit) l.Rajesham, aged 50 years, R/o Kakateeya Nagar R.K.Puram, Neredmet, Secunderabad

¶66

....RespondenUWrit Petitioner

¶67

2 State of Telangara, represented by Principal Secretary, l,4irority Welfare, Telangana Secretariat, Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶68

3 Alamgiri Masjid. Ciraveyard and Eidgah, Guttala Begumpet'/i lage, Serlingampally N4irndal, Ranga Reddy District, represented )y its l\rlanaging Committee and P'esident Mohd. Yousuf resident of H.No.B-+-369/1 . Sai Ram Nagar, Site lll, Borabanda, Hyderabad.

¶69

...RespondenUResponrient Nos.1 and 4

¶70

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 pl :as,:d to kindly order the photographs to be included in the record and please to ltas:; orders that the construction found to h ave come up after the interim orders pz ssed by the Hon'ble

¶71

¶72

High court may be removed all the structures raised after passing common Orders by this Hon'ble court in W.P.No.1 1048 of 2018 dated 18-04-2018. '!

¶73

lA NO: 4 OF 20'18

¶74

Between:

¶75

lVohammed Yousuf, S/o ltl]ohammed lbrahim @ Mastan, aged about 60 years, Occupation: Business, resident of H.No.8-4-369/'1 , Sai Ram Nagar, Site lll, Borabanda, Hyderabad - 500 018' Telangana

¶76

...petitioner/proposed Respondent No.4

¶77

AND1 Balamrai Cooperative Housing Society Ltd, having registered Office at Plot No.96. Dhanalaxmi Colony, lt4ahendra Hills, East lvlarredpally, Secunderabad represented by its President l.Raja Babu Sit) l.Rajesham, aged 50 years, R/o Kakateeya Nagar, R.K.Puram, Neredmet, Secunderabad

¶78

....Writ Petitioner

¶79

2 State of Telangana, represented by Principal Secretary, l,4inority Welfare, Telangana Secretariat, Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶80

3 Telangana State Wakf Board, Haj House, Opp. Public Gardens. Nampally, Hyderabad, reptd. by its Chief Executive Officer.

¶81

4 The Chief Executive Officer, Telangana State Wakf Board, Haj House. Opp. Public Gardens, Nampally. Hyderabad.

¶82

....Respondent Nos.1 to 3/ RespondentsMrit Petitioners/Respondent 1 to 3

¶83

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 pass orders impleading the petitioner herein as respondent No.4 in Writ Petition No.11048 of 2018 as well as in the Writ Petition [,4iscellaneous Petition (l.As) filed therein

¶84

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. P. VENKAT REDDY

¶85

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: THE ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL

¶86

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3: SRI S.R. MAHAJIR

¶87

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI P. VENKAT REDDY

¶88

Counsel for the Proposed Respondent No.4: SRI G.M. MOHIUDDIN

¶89

WRIT PETITION NO: 11072 OF 2018

¶90

Betwee n:

¶91

'1 . Pallavi Enclave Owner's Welfare Association, (a society registered under A.P. Societies Act. Vide.Regd.No.1235 of 1997), Represented by lts President Sri. B.Srinivas, S/o.Late B.Ramakrishna Aged 47 years, Occ Business, Rio. Addagutta, Secunderabad

¶92

Y.Harishchandra Prasad, S/o.Y.Sreeramulu Aged 58 years, Occupation Engineer, R/o.1 26, Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad - 500 073.

¶93

Dr.K.Suma, D/o.Sri K.Krishna Rao, Aged 5'1 years, Occupation lr,4edical Practitioner, R/o.H.No.12-'l 1-253, Warasiguda, Secunderabad - 61

¶94

,..PETITIONERS

¶95

AND

¶96

¶97

State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary, llinc'rity Welfare, Government of T€,langana, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderab,rd

¶98

Telangana State \iakf Board, represented by its Chief Exec.rtivr: Officer , Office at Haj House, Ra;:zackManzil , Nampally, Hyderabad

¶99

Chief Executive Cfficer , Telangana State Wakf Board, Havi rg c,ffice at Haj House, Razzacklllanzil, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶100

Alamgiri lVlasjid Ciraveyard and Eidgah, Guttala Begumpet'/i lage. Serlingampally lVlandal, Ranga Reddy District, represented l)y its l,4anagtng Committee and P-esident lr/ohd. Yousuf resident of H.No.B-1-369/1 . Sai Ram Nagar, Site lll, Borabanda, Hyderabad.

¶101

(R-4 is impleaded as prer Court Order, dated 09.08.2018 in l.A.lJo.3 of 2018.)

¶102

...RESPONDENTS

¶103

Petition under Article 226 oI lhe Constitution of lndia prerying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Col rt ntay be^pleased to issue a Writ of fvlanda1]us or any other appropriate writ or o ders and quash the Gazette Notification =.No.2114 (a)/RR/2015, dated 25.01 2018 published in Telangana Gazette datr:d 08.02.20't 8 and also the supplementzrl gazette notification F.No.21lL4 (a)/RR/201€ published in the Telangana Gazette daktd 22.02.2O,1 B issued under Section 40 of the Wakf Act 1995 as lllegal, Arbitrary and ;onlrary to Waqf Act, 1995 and also violati,re r:f Articles 14, 21 and 300-4 of the Cor stitution of lndia and consequently direct tl-€r respondents not to interfere with he possession and enjoyment of the petitioners over the land in Sy.Nos.1 to 9 arimeasuring Ac.90.17 guntas situated at Gut:alabegimpet Village, Serilingampally lV rnd,al, Ranga Reddy District.

¶104

lA NO: 1 OF 20"18

¶105

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circun slances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be ple rase;d to grant stay of dispossession of the petitioners from the subject land in Sy.No:;.1 o I admeasuring Ac.90.17 guntas situatod at GuttalabegimpetVillage, Serilingampally lt4andal, Ranga Reddy District, pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶106

lA NO: 2 OF 2018

¶107

Petition under Sootion 1 51 CPC praying that in the circun sta lces stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pl,:asr:d to suspend the operation and effect of the Gazette Notification F.No.21i LA (a^ri RR|2015, dated 25.O1 .2018, published in Telangana Gazette, dated 0B.0ll.2C l Band also the supplemental gazette notification F.No.21lL4 (a)/RRJ2016, dated 19.02.2018, published in the Telanrlana Gazette daled 22.02.2018, pendinry disposal of the writ petition, pending disposal of the writ petition.

IA NO: 4 OF 2018

Betwee n:

1 The Telangana State Wakf Board, represlnted by its Chief Executive Offrcer, Office at Haj House, Razzackl/anzil , Nampally, Hyderabad

¶112

2 The Chief Executive Officer, Telangana State Wakf Board, Having office at Haj House, RazzackManzil, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶113

...Petitioners/Respondent No.2 & 3

¶114

AND

¶115

1 Pallavi Enclave Owner's Welfare Association, (a society registered under A.P. Societies Act. Vide.Regd.No.1235 of 1997), Represented by lts President Sri. B.Srinivas, S/o.Late B.Ramakrishna Aged 47 years, Occ Business, Rio. Addagutta, Secunderabad

¶116

2 Y.Harishchandra Prasad, S/o.Y. Sreeramulu Aged 58 years, Occupation Engineer, R/o.126, Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad - 500 073.

¶117

3 Dr.K.Suma, Dio.Sri K.Krishna Rao, Aged 51 years, Occupation l,4edical Practitioner, R/o.H.No.12-1 1-253, Warasiguda, Secunderabad - 61

¶118

. Responde nts/Writ Petitioners

¶119

4 State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary, Minority Welfare, Government of Telangana, Telangana Secrelariat, Hyderabad

¶120

. Res po n de nURe s po n de n t No.1

¶121

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 kindly order the Photograph to be include in the record and please to pass orders that construction found to have come up after the interim orders passed by the honble high court may be removed.

¶122

lA NO: 5 OF 2018

¶123

Between:

¶124

[,4ohammed Yousuf, S/o l,4ohammed lbrahim @ ltlastan, aged about 60 years, Occupation: Business, resident of H.No.8-4-369/1 , Sai Ram Nagar, Site lll, Borabanda, Hyderabad - 500 018' Telangana

¶125

...^{petitioner/proposed} Respondent No.4

¶126

AND

¶127

1 Pallavi Enclave Owner's Welfare Association, (a society registered under A.P. Societies Act. Vide.Regd.No.1235 of 1997), Represented by lts President Sri. B.Srinivas, Sio.Late B.Ramakrishna Aged 47 years, Occ Business, Rio. Addagutta, Secunderabad

¶128

2 Y.Harishchandra Prasad, S/o.Y.Sreeramulu Aged 58 years, Occupation Engineer, R/o.'126, Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad - 500 073.

¶129

3 Dr.K.Suma, D/o.Sri K.Krishna Rao, Aged 5'1 years, Occupation l/edical Practitioner, Rlio.H.No.'12-1 1-253, Warasiguda, Secunderabad - 61

¶130

...Writ Petitioners

¶131

4 State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary, Minority Welfare, Government of Telangana, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶132

5 Telangana State Wakf Board, represented by its Chief Executive Officer , Office at Haj House, Razzacklt4anzil , Nampally, Hyderabad

¶133

6 Chief Executive Officer , Telangana State Wakf Board, Having office at Haj House, Razzacklt4anzil, NampaIly, Hyderabad.

¶134

....Respondent Nos.1 to 3/

¶135

RespondentsM/rit Petitioners/Respondent 1 to 3

¶136

¶137

Petition under S€ ction 151 CPC praying,,.that in the circun stances stated in the affidavit filed in supporl of the^petition, the High Court may be^pl:as-.d to^pass orders impleading the petition3r herein as respondent No.4 in Writ F etilion No. .1 1072 of 2018 as well as in the V/rit Petition fi/iscellaneous Petitions^(l.As filed therein.

¶138

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. T.V. KALYAN SINGH

¶139

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: THE ADDITIONAL ADVOCT\TE GENERAL

¶140

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3: SRI S.R. MAHAJIR

¶141

Counsel for the Respondent No.4:

¶142

Counsel for the Proposed Respondent No.4: SRI G.M. MOHIUDDIN

¶143

'WRIT PETITION NO: 11375 OF 2018

¶144

Between:

¶145

K. Rama Krishna, S/o Sri. K.S.N. Murthy, Aged about 55 years, Occ.Business, R/o. B/1 10 lVladhura Nagar, Hyderabad.

¶146

V.Gandhi, S/o. Sri. K.Krishnamurthy, Aged about 60 years. Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Pedda Gonnur, Krishna District, Represented By his G^trA holder, K. Rama Krishna, S/o. Sri. K.S.N, lVurthy, aged about 55 years, Occ. Business, R/o. B/1 10 Madhura Nagar, l-lyderabad

¶147

KSN [r,/urthy, S/c. Ramaiah, Aged about 83 years, Occ.Flad. Life, Rio. B/1 10, l,4ad hura Nagar, llyderabad.

¶148

...PETITIONERS

¶149

AND

¶150

1 State of Telangarra, Rep. by its Secretary, l\4inority Welfare Det,artment, Secretariat Buildirrgs, Hyderabad.

¶151

2 Telangana State'//aqf Board, Rep. by its Chief Executive o ficer, Haj House, Razzack lVlanzil, l"Jampally, Hyderabad.

¶152

3 Chief Executive^()fficer, Telangana State Wakf Board, Hal llous;e, Razzack Manzil, Nampaily Hyderabad.

¶153

4 Alamgiri Masjid.^(iraveyard and Eidgah, Guttala Begumpet /illage, Serlingampally l,4andal, Ranga Reddy District, represented ly ils l\rlanaging Committee and President lvlohd. Yousuf resident of H.No.8-4-3119/1 , Sai Ram Nagar, Site lll, Bc,rabanda, Hyderabad.

¶154

(R-4 is impleaded as per Court Order, dated 09.08.2018 in l.A l,lo.li of 2018.)

¶155

.,.ttESPONDENTS

¶156

Petition under P,rticle 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Corrrt nray be pleased to issue a writ, order or olders more particularly one in the nature of rvrit of mandamus or any olher appropriate writ and quash the Gazette Noti'ica'ion F.No. 21lL4 (a)i RR/2015, dated ,15-01-2018 published notification F .l1o 21lL4(a)lRR/2016, published in the Telangana Gazette daled 22-02-2018 issued ur der section 40 of the Wakf Act 1995 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to Waqf Act, 1€95 and also violative Articles 14,21 and 303-A of the Constitution of lndia and co rsequently direct the respondents not to intr:rfere with the possession and enjoymr,nt tf the petitioners

¶157

¶158

over the and in Sy.Nos.1 to I admeasuring Ac. 90-17 Gts situated at Guttalabegumpet Village, Serilingampally lvlandal, Ranga Reddy District. \

¶159

lA NO: I OF 2018

¶160

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 grant stay of dispossession of the petitioners from the subject land in Sy.NOs. 1 to I admeasuring Ac. 90-'1 7 guntas situated at Guttalabegimpet Village, Serilingampally [/andal, Ranga Reddy District, pending disposal of the Writ Petition.

¶161

lA NO: 2 OF 2018

¶162

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavrt filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operatron and effect of the Gazette Notification F.No.21lLA(a)/RR/2015, dated 25-012018, published in Telangana District Gazette, dated 08-02-2018 and also the supplemental gazette notification F.NO.21lL4(a)1RRl2016, dated 19-02-2018 published in the state Gazette Daled 22-02-20'18, pending disposal of the Writ Petition.

¶163

lA NO: 4 OF 2018

¶164

Between:

¶165

'l Telangana State Waqf Board, Rep. by its Chief Executive officer, Haj House, Razzack Manzil, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶166

2 Chief Executive Officer, Telangana State Wakf Board, Haj House, Razzack l\rlanzil, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶167

...Petitioners/Respondent Nos.2 & 3

¶168

AND

¶169

1 K. Rama Krishna, S/o Sri. K.S.N. lVlurthy, Aged about 55 years, Occ.Business, R/o. B/1 10 Madhura Nagar, Hyderabad.

¶170

2 V.Gandhi, S/o. Sri. K.Krishnamurthy, Aged about 60 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Pedda Gonnur, Krishna District, Represented By his GPA holder, K. Rama Krishna, S/o. Sri. K.S.N. tr/urthy, aged about 55 years, Occ. Business, R/o. Bi 1 10 l,4adhura Nagar, Hyderabad

¶171

3 KSN N,4urthy, S/o. Ramaiah, Aged about 83 years, Occ.Rad. Life, Rio. B/1 10, l,4adhura Nagar, Hyderabad.

¶172

. Respondents/VVrit Petitioners

¶173

4 The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Secretary, Ivlinority Welfare Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyd era bad.

¶174

, Res po n d e nURe s po n d e nt No.1

¶175

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 kindly order the photographs to be included in the record and please to pass orders that the construction found to have come up after the interim orders passed by the Hon'ble High court may be removed.

lA NO: 5 OF 2018

Between:

[,4ohammed Yousuf, S/o lvlohammed lbrahim @ Mastan, aged abc ut 60 years, Occupation: Business. rt:sident of H.No.8-4-369/'1 , Sai Ram Nagar, Sile Ill, Borabanda, Hyderabad - 500 0l S Telangana'

¶180

...petitioneri^proposed nespondent No.4

¶181

AND

¶182

1 K. Rama Krishna, S/o Sri. K.S.N. IVlurthy, Aged about 55 years, Occ.Business, RJo. B/1 10 l\4adhura Nagar, Hyderabad.

¶183

2 V.Gandhi, S/o. Sri. K.Krishnamurthy, Aged about 60 years, Occ:. Agriculture, R/o. Pedda Gonnur, {rishna District, Represented By his G^)A holder, K. Rama Krishna, S/o. Sri. K.S.N. Murthy, aged about 55 years, Occ. Business, R/o. B/1 10 It/adhura Nagar, tlyderabad

¶184

3 KSN l/urthy, S/o. Ramaiah, Aged about 83 years, Occ.Flad. Life, Rio. B/1 10, l,4adhura Nagar, llyderabad.

¶185

Writ Petitioners

¶186

4 State of Telangara, Rep. by its Secretary, IMinority Welfare )epartment, Secretariat Buildirrgs, Hyderabad.

¶187

5 Telangana State\Naqf Board, Rep. by its Chief Executive o ficer, Haj House, Razzack Manzi , l.Jampally, Hyderabad.

¶188

6 The Chief Execut re Officer, Telangana State Wakf Board, lla.1 llouse, Razzack It4anzil, Nampa ly Hyderabad.

¶189

....Rer;pondent Nos.1 to 3/ Respondents/VVrit Petitioner s/Respondent 1 to 3

¶190

Petition under Sec;tion^'1 51 CPC praying that in the circurnstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pl :as,:d to pass orders impleading the petitioner herein as respondent No.4 in Writ Petitiln I'1o.11375 of 2018 as well as in the Writ Pe t tion Miscellaneous Petition (l.As) filed tlrer€in.

¶191

Counsel for the Petitiorrer: SRl. BOGGULA RAJU

¶192

Counsel for the Resporident No.1: THE ADDITIONAL ADVOCI\TE GENERAL

¶193

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3: SRI S.R. MAHAJIR

¶194

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI. BOGGULA RAJU

¶195

Counsel for the Proposed Respondent No.4: SRI G.M. MOHIU lDlN

¶196

Between:

¶197

J. Rama Krishna Rao S/o. J. Chokka Rao, Aged about 74 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. H.No. 1-2-593t3) Gagan l/ahal Colony, Himayathnagar, t,UO,,r1?.At,TtONER

¶198

AND

¶199

The State of Telarrgana, Represented by its Principal Secre ary lv4inorities Welfare Departmernt, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶200

The Telangana Slate Wakf Board, Haj House, Opp, Public Oarcens, Nampally, Hyderabad, Represented by its Chief Executive Officer.

¶201

The Chief Executive Officer, Telangana State Wakf Board, llaj llouse, Opp. Public Gardens. Nlampally, Hyderabad.

¶202

¶203

The lVlanaging Committee, IV/s. Alamgiri [\4asjid, Eidgah and Graveyard, At Guttala Begumpet Village, Serlingampally tt/andal, Ranga Reddy District, Represented by its President

¶204

...RES'.NDENTS

¶205

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, one more particularly in the nature of Writ of l/andamus or any other Writ including or any combination of Writs declaring that the action of the Respondents in issuing the Gazette Notification Nos.6 (FileNo.21lLA(a)/RR/2015) and 25 (File no.21l14(a)/RR/2016) dated 08-02-2018 and 22-02-2018 respectively as Arbitrary, lllegal, without Jurisdiction and Ultra-vires of the provisions of the Wakf Act, 1995 and consequently set-aside the same and direct the Respondents not to interfere with the Petitioners possession and enjoyment of the subject land.

¶206

lA NO:^"l OF 2018

¶207

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 suspend the operation and affect of the impugned Board Gazette Notification Nos.6 (File No.21lLA(a)/RRl2O15) and 25 (File no.21l14(a)/RR/2016) dated 08-02-2018 and 2202-2018 respectively, declaring the lands in Sy.Nos.1 to 9 of Guttala Begumpet Village, Serilingampally lVlandal, Ranga Reddy District, to be attached to Wakf Alamgiri [,4osque, pending disposal of the Writ petition.

¶208

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. V. RAMAKRISHNA REDDY

¶209

Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: THE ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL

¶210

Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.2 & 3: SRI M.A. MUJEEB SC FOR WAKF BOARD

¶211

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: NONE APPEARED

¶212

WRIT PETITION NO: 2327 OF 2019

¶213

Between:

¶214

Addagutta Cooperative Housing Society, B.Damodar, S/o. late B.Chinnaiah, Aged. about 72 Yrs., Occ. Business, R/o. Plot No.44 and 45, Balamrai Society, l,4a he nd ra h i lls, Ea st l,4a rred pa I ly, Secu nd e rabad.

¶215

.,,PETITIONER

¶216

AND

¶217

I State of Telangana, represented by Principal Secretary Minority Welfare, Telangana Secretariat, Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶218

2 Telangana State Wakf Board, Haj House, Opp. Public Gardens, Nampally, Hyderabad, reptd. by its Chief Executive Officer.

¶219

1. The Chief Executive Officer, Telangana State Wakf Board, Haj House, Opp. Public Gardens, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶220

4 The l,4anaging Committee, Alamgiri tr/asjid, Eidgah and Graveyard, At Guttala Begumpet Village, Serlingampally l,4andal, Ranga Reddy District, Represented bY its President

¶221

..RESP.NDENTS

¶222

¶223

Petition under A.rticle 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High CoLrrt nray be pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, one more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ including or any combinatiln of Writs declaring that the action of the Respondents in issuing the Gazette Nctification Nos.6 (File No.21ILA(a)/RR/2O15) and 25 (File no.21lLA(a)/RR/2016) datec 0B-02-2018 and 2202-2018 respectively ar Arbitrary, lllegal, without Jurisdictron u nd Ultra-vires of the provisions of the Wakf r\ct. 1995 and consequently set-aside th€ sa-ne and direct the Respondents not to intorfere with the Petitioner Society's posse ssion and enjoyment of the subject land.

¶224

lA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶225

Petition under Se,ction^'l 51 CPC praying that in the circurrstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pkrased to suspend the operation and affect of the impugned Board Gazette Notificati rn lrlos, Nos. 6 (File NO.21lLA(a)/RR/2015) and25(FileNO.21lLA(a)/RR/2016) dt 08-02-2018and2202-2018 respectively rleclaring the lands in Sy. Nos.^'1 to 9,rf Ciuttala Begumpet Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District to be atta;hed to wakf Alamgiri Mosque pending disposal of the above Writ Petition.

¶226

lA NO: 2 OF 2019

¶227

Between:

¶228

1 Telangana State'r'/akf Board, Haj House, Opp. Public Gardens Nampally, Hyderabad, reptd. by its Chief Executive Officer,

¶229

2 The Chief Execut ve Officer, Telangana State Wakf Board, llaj 'louse, Opp. Public Gardens, l..lampally, Hyderabad.

¶230

...Petitioners/Respondent No.2 & 3

¶231

AND

¶232

1 Addagutta Cooperative Housing Society, B.Damodar, S/o. lrte 13.Chinnaiah, Aged. about 72 Yrs., Occ. Business, R/o. Plot No.44 and 45, Balamrai Society, N'4ahendrahills' East lt/arredpally' Secunderabad

¶233

....R.spondenupetitioner

¶234

2 The State of Telangana, represented by Principal Secretary lr4inority Welfare, Telangana Secre:ariat, Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶235

3 The lr/anaging Committee, Alamgiri lVasjid, Eidgah and Graveyard, At Guttala Begumpet Village, Serlingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy D strirt. Represented by its President.

¶236

(R-3 not necessary tO this Petition.)

¶237

...Resporrde rts/Respondents

¶238

¶239

Petjtion 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 vacate orders dt : 07 02.2019 passed in W.P.No.2327 bf 2019 dt: in the interest of justice.

¶240

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. P. RAGHAVENDRA RAO

¶241

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: THE ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL

¶242

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3: SRI M.A. MUJEEB

¶243

SC FOR WAKF BOARD

¶244

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: NONE APPEARED

¶245

WRIT PETITION NO: 2328 OF 2019

¶246

Between:

¶247

Sri B.Damodar, S/o. late B.Chinnaiah, Aged.about 72 Yts., Occ.Business, R/o.Plot No.44 and 45, Balamrai Society, N4ahend ra hills, East Marredpally, Secunderabad, ...PETITIONER

¶248

AND1. State of Telangana, represenled by Principal Secretary Minority Welfare, Telangana Secretariat, Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶249

1. Telangana State Wakf Board, Haj House, Opp. Public Gardens, Nampally, Hyderabad, reptd. by its Chief Executive Officer.

¶250

1. The Chief Executive Officer, Telangana State Wakf Board, Haj House, Opp. Public Gardens, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶251

1. The Managing Committee, Alamgiri Masjid, Eidgah and Graveyard, At Guttala Begumpet Village, Serlingampally l,4andal, Ranga Reddy District, Represented bY its President

¶252

..RE'P.NDENTS

¶253

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, one more particularly in the nature of Writ of lrlandamus or any other Writ including or any combination of Writs declaring that the action of the Respondents in issuing the Gazette Notification Nos.6 (File No.21lLA(a)iRR/2015) and 25 (File no.21l14(a)/RR/20'16) dated 08-02-2018 and 22-02-2018 respectively as Arbitrary, lllegal, without Jurisdiction and Ultra-vires of the provisions of the Wakf Act, 1995 and consequently set-aside the same and direct the Respondents not to interfere with the Petitioner Society s possession and enjoyment of the subject land.

¶254

lA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶255

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 suspend the operation and affect of the impugned Board Gazette Notification Nos. 6^(File No. 21lLA(a)/RR /2015) and 25 ( File No.21lLA(a) /RRi2016) dt. 08-02-2018 and 22-022018 respectrvely, declaring the lands in Sy. Nos. 1 to 9 of Guttala Begumpet Village,

¶256

l-1

¶257

Serilingampally l/anda, Ranga Reddy District to be attach<:d lo wakf Alamgiri I/osque pending disposal of the above Writ Pet'ition.

¶258

lA NO: 2 OF 2019

¶259

Between:

¶260

1 Telangana State^tiVakf Board, Haj House, Opp. Public Gard,:ns, Nampally, Hyderabad, reptd by its Chief Executive Officer.

¶261

2 The Chief Execut v'e Officer, Telangana State Wakf Board, llal l-louse, Opp Public Gardens. l'Jampally, Hyderabad.

¶262

... Petitione rs/R(,s ponde nt Nos.2 & 3

¶263

AND

¶264

1 Sri B.Damodar, S/o. late B.Chinnaiah, Aged.about 72 Yrs.,^r)cc Business, R/o.Plot No.44 ard 45, Balamrai Society, Mahendrahills, East l\larredpally, Secunderabad.

¶265

...Rr sp<>ndenUPetitioner

¶266

2 State of Telangara, represented by Principal Secretary Min rrity Welfare, Telangana Secre.ariat, Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶267

3 The Managing Committee, Alamgiri Masjid, Eidgah and Graveyard, At Guttala Begumpet Village, Serlingampally firlandal, Ranga Reddy D strirl, Represented by its President.

¶268

(R-3 not necessary to this petition.)

¶269

...Resporrdents/Respondents

¶270

Petition under Serction 151 CPC praying that in the circun stances stated in the affidavit filed in supporl of the petition, the High Court may t e^p leased to vacate orders dt 07 .02.2019 p;rssed in W.P. No. 2328 of 2019 dt: in the interest of^justice.

¶271

Counsel for the Petilioner: SRl. AVINASH DESAI

¶272

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: THE ADDITIONAL ADVOC,\TE GENERAL

¶273

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3: SRI M.A. MUJEEB

¶274

SC FOR WAKF BOARD

¶275

Counsel for the Resporrdent No.4: NONE APPEARED

¶276

WRIT PETITION NO: 13094 OF 2019

¶277

Between:

¶278

C. Ramdas, S/o Yacagiri, Aged about 70 years, Occ. Retd. Errployee,R/o H.No 6-'1l03ll04,AbinavColcny,PadmaRaoNagar,Secunderabad.

¶279

...pETlTlONER

¶280

AND1. The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secr( tary', Ivlinorities Welfare Department, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶281

The Telangana State Wakf Board, Haj House, Opp.Public^(iarcens, Nampally, Hyderabad, Reprr:sented by its Chief Executive Officer.

¶282

The Chief Execu'ive Officer, Telangana State Wakf Board, Haj House, Opp. Public Gardens, \ampally, Hyderabad.

¶283

The lt4anaging Ci)mmittee, IVI/s. Alamgiri Masjid, Eidgah as Graveyard,At Guttala Begumpet Villagr:, Serlingampally Ir/andal, Ranga Reddy Drstrict, Represented by its President.

¶284

...RESPONDENTS

¶285

l-s

¶286

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying lhat in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, one more particularly in the nature of Writ of lVandamus or any other Writ including or any combination of Writs declaring that the action of the Respondents in issuing the Gazette Notification Nos.6 (File No.21lLA(a)/RR/2015) and 25 (File no.21l14(a)/RR/2016) dated 08-02-2018 and 22-02-2018 respectively as arbitrary, illegal, without Jurisdiction and Ultra-vires of the provisions of the Wakf Act, 1995 and consequently set-aside the same and direct the Respondents not to interfere with the Petitioners possession and enjoyment of the subject land.

¶287

lA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶288

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 suspend the operation and affect of the impugned Board Gazette Notification Nos.6 (File No.21lLA(a)/RR/2015) and 25 (File No.2'll14(a)/RR/2016) dated 08-02-2018 and 2202-2018 respectively, declaring the lands in Sy.Nos.'1 to 9 of Guttala Begumpet Village,Serilingam pally lt4andal, Ranga Reddy District, to be attached to Wakf Alamgiri l\4osque, pending disposal of the Writ petition.

¶289

lA NO: 2 OF 2019

¶290

Between:

¶291

1 The Telangana State Wakf Board, Haj House, Opp.Public Gardens, Nampally, Hydera bad, Represe nted by its Chief Executive Officer.

¶292

2 The Chief Execulive Officer, Telangana State Wakf Board, Haj House, Opp. Public Gardens, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶293

...Petitioners/Respondent Nos.2 & 3

¶294

AND

¶295

1 C. Ramdas, S/o Yadagiri, Aged about 70^years, Occ. Retd. Employee,R/o H.No.6-1-'103/104, Abinav Colony,Padma Rao Nagar, Secunderabad.

¶296

...RespondenUPetitioner

¶297

2 The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, lt/inorities Welfare Department, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶298

3 The lVanaging Committee, lt4/s. Alamgiri Masjid, Eidgah as Graveyard,At^Guttala Begumpet Village,Serlingampally lvlandal, Ranga Reddy District, Represented by its President.

¶299

(R-3 not necessary to this petition.)

¶300

Respondents/Respondents

¶301

¶302

Petition under Sec:ion 1 51 CPC praying that in the circum stances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be^p eas;ed to dismiss the Writ Petition in and linrini further pray to vacate the interim orders dt. 28-06-2019 passed in this writ petiticn No.^'1 3094 of 2019 and further pray.

¶303

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. V. RAMAKRISHNA REDDY

¶304

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: THE ADDITIONAL ADVOC,\TE GENERAL

¶305

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3: SRI M.A. MUJEEB SC FOR WAKF BOARD

¶306

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: NONE APPEARED

¶307

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶308

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

¶309

WRIT PETITON Nos.19424 of 2OL7, 3140, 3165, L 1O4B, tLa72, 11375 & 415O2 of2O18 and2327,232a &, 13094 of 2O19

¶310

C[iMMON ORDER:

¶311

Sincc' thc issr-rc involvcd in arli thcsr: u.ri I pctiliorrs is or rr.' irnd tht'- sanic. thcv arc brring i-rcard logeLhcr an(l disposed of by r,vay of this Common Order

¶312

2 W.P.No.19424 of 2017 is filed challenging the notilicaLion in File No.23lLa(a)lRRl2OI4, daLcd 13.04.2017 published in Der:can Chronicle Neu,'s daily on 14.04 20 I7. u'l'rcrcin the re spondent pr'ocecding to declare llri: llLrd arl rrx:asr-rr'irrg Ac.()0.1'I S,untas in Sy.Nos. 1 to 9 c.[ (]riltala l3cgunrpct villagc. Si:iilingampaly, I?.R.Districl. as 'u, aclf Propcrtl' undcl Scction^,1 0 of the Waqf Act, 1995. ? W.l).Nos.31/iO & 31r,5 ol 2018 are fi1ec1 challenging the Memo I.'.No.21lL4 (a)7RIf/2016, datcd 16.01.20t8, lclt:cting the objcctions liied b,r, the pctitioners in^pursi-ran1 to noiillcatiorr datcci I 3.04.,20 1 7 1 lvrit lrctition Nos. 11048, l'1C72, 1l375 & 41502 ol 20 1B and 2327 , 2328 & lll094 ol 2A19, arc liled cherllenging thc G:rzettc nol.ification Nos.6 1^File No.2 1 /LA(a)/RR/2015) and 25 (I'-ilc No.21 /La(a)/RR/2016) riaicci OB.02.2Ol8 and 22.02.2018, respect:ive1y. rvherein ir:r iL,-rri wirrr,.rl.rr,. lh<: l:tnd 1t-, an oxlon1 ol^{Acs.90. 17 gl-s;.}

¶313

sv.Nos.1 to !). situated at^(luttala Bcgurr p,e- /illage, Serilingampall'.' Mandal, Ranga Recldy Distrir;t^'for short 'the subject property'/'subject land') has been de clared as property att:rt:hed to the Waqf cal1ed 'Alamgiri ,losqtre'. grave yard and Eidgah.

¶314

Brief feL<:ls, which are necessary for disp rsal ol thcse r,,,rit petitions. 1re as follorvs:

¶315

One Mrss. Decosta was the o/ner and pos;sessor of the land to ar1 extent of Acs.94.17 gts in S-v-.Nos.1 to 9, situated at Gutta-1a Begumpet, Village, the then H1'cierabad West Taluq eLncl presently, Serilingampa1l1, Mandal. Rar-rga Rcclcly Distr c. having purcl-rase d thc sam r .n public auction lrom Surf-c-khas authoritics. beir-rg thc pcrsonal properties ol IltrH The Nizam ol Hyderabad n tl-ie _vears ill26 Fasli (1916) and 1327 Pasli (1917). u,h ch inclucles the subject prc,perties in tlicse rvrit petitions. I)atta ri as granted in hcr lavour in the year1326 and Setrrar u'as aiso issued by the Slurf-e-khas authorities

¶316

After the death ol said Miss. Decosta. ti-rc sublcct property devoh'cd on her sole 1egal heir one Mr. Lt Col. G.E. Cox and his n.rme was recorded in pahanies fcr the years 1949-7959 anrl also khasra pahanies i954-115i;. He in 1n turn sold the land to an extent of Acs.93.1 I Elrntas 51'.No.1 to 9 to one B.Ramalingesu'ara Rao und:r' r'egistered sale deed datecl 06.05. 1963 elfter obtaining pcrrtission 1i-om

¶317

A It II.J WPs 19424 20l7& batch

¶318

the revenue authorities under Sections 47 and 48 of the i.P.(Telangana Area) Tenancy & Agricultura-l Lands Act, 1950. The narne of said B.Ramaiingeshu.ar Rao was rnutated in the revenue records as pattad;rr vide lrloceeclines^{dated 21.O4.1964} ',,r,ho^{in turn gilted Acs.90 rr-:} Sy.Nos.2 part and 3 to 9 to H1,fls145.d Archdiocese Society (fbr short 'the said Society') under an unregistered Gilt Dcecl dated 05.10.1973 and same \vere validated by MRO, Scrilingampally under Section 5A of the AP.Rights in Land & Pattadar Pass Book Act, 1971 (for short'the Act of 1971') vide proceedings No.C 1752 192, dated 10.09.1993, after collecting necessary stamp duties under the pro.",isions of the Inclian Stamp Act, 1899.^'lhereafter, the said society sold the land to an extent of 52 acres to various people i.e., .\cs.8.00 to B.l)amodar, Acs.8.00 gts to M.Komaraiah, ,\cs.7.27 to M/s.Ralamreri C<>-opcrative Housing Societl Limited, Acs.B.00 to S.Satish Reddy, Acs.B.00 to NI / s.Addagutta Co-operative Housing Society Limited, ,\cs.5.00 to M.Rajesham, Acs.7.13 gts to Ch.Mallesh under alIl unregistered sale deeds, which u,ere validated under Scction 5-A of thi: Act of 197 1. Out of Ar:s.8.00 of land purchased by B.Damodar, Acs.6.00 was converted inl.o housing plots and sold t.o M/s.Pallavi Enclave Owners' r\ssociatiot-t.

¶319

Basing on the applioation dated 25.06. 19i37 b1-^or-re Abdul Khadar claiming to be the Presider-rt ol t r,: NIar-ragir-rg Committee of :he subject property, A.P. Sratc \Vaqf Board issued gazette notification dated 29.02. 1988 u rder Section 25 ol the WaqiAct, i954 notifying the subject property as Waqf propertv. Challenging the same, the saic sc,cietl' ar-rd one another person instituted a Writ No.23792 ol 95, r,',hich rvas allovued br order dated 04.12.2OO t hold r-rg that t1-re said Gazettc notification \vas issued in vrolation oi principles ol n,ilural justicc as no noticer n'as i ;su e'cl to thc allected parties;. Aggrieved by the same, three sepil'ate urit appeals i.e., 215, 578 and 625 lO2 are liled r\ r\P State Waqf Board.^()ne individual and Government oI AP. Mcannhik:, thr: AP Waql Board also filed ar-r airltlication undcr Section il(1) of the A.P.l-and Grabbing ['r,rhibitior-r) Act, 1982 (for short'the Act of 1982') in LG(l lJo.151 of 1996 seeking cleclaration that the said soci:ty ald 19 others as iar-lcl grabbers and also for po:rsession by dispossessing the respondents therein, who are sorrre of the petitioners hcrcrn also liled al application und,tf iiection 8 of the Act ol 19182 in L.G.C.No.155 of 1996 on the lile ol Special Cour'1 constitutcd undcr i.P. LanrI t.]rabbing (Prohibition) r\ct, 1982. The Sper:ial Court undcr A.P. Latrd Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, after going through the issue of tit1e. and possession, dismissed the LGC No. 151 ol 1996

¶320

ARR.J U'Ps 19414 2017& batch

¶321

liled by the AP State Waqf Board vide judgment dated 19.09.2003 and also dismissed L.G.C.No. 155 of 1996. Challenging the judgment daLed 19.09.2003 rendered by the Spi. Court under Land Grerbbing Court, the Waqf Board iiled WP No.26553/2003, u,hich is tagged on to the Writ ,\ppcarl Nos. 215. 578 and 625/02 and samc u,crc hearcl Logether by the Division Bench. The Division Bench of this Court by Common Order dated 03.12.2O10 held that the Wacll Board lailed to establish the element of land grabbing to ir-rvoke the jurisdiction of Land Grabbing Court lor cviction of the respondents in LGC and held that the authorities are at libertv to u,ork out their rcmcdies with r-egard to declaration of 1-itle to the subject property in an appropriate lorum. The findings of the Land Grabbing Court w'ith regard to title urele not upheld. It is also hcld that the title of the subject properties will be subject to the declaration by the competent court in properly constituted suits and other proceedings. Aggrieved by the orders passcci b1. the Division Bench of this Court, the said societl, and several othcr pcrsons inctuding the petitioners herein filcd revieu, petition vide W.A.M.P. No.2394 and 2436 ol 201 I in WA Nos.215 of 2OO2 & W.A.M.P No.5368 of 201¹ & batch ar-id same were allowed bv order dated 18.04.2016 Chzrllenging the same, AP State Waqf Board filed separate Spt-'cial ,Leave Petitions before the FIon'ble Supreme Court

¶322

\ l,\ t() l--^I l0l-& i..rlclr

¶323

in CC Nos.19119-19122115 and Civil Appeal lios.26B-278 of 2Ol7 arisinq out of SLP (C ) Nos.934-944 of22O17 and C.C.Nos.21835-21845 of 2016 challenging the ,rrders in review petitions and same were disposed of rt'- Common .Iudgement d,rte d 9.0 7.2O17 .

¶324

8 The Hon'b1e Supreme Court, while lechning to interlere u.ith r-he finding recorded by the Higir Court that the notilication in question rvas issued v,,ithcut follolr,ing the proper procedure, observed that it is open to the authclrities to issue anv lresh notification in ac cordance with 1aw. In^{(), Nos. 268-278 ol 2O17 (arisin11 out ol Sl-P (C ) Nos.93.1-9,11 of2O77 (ri CC Nos.2l835 21815 o1 16lik:cl against revierv proceedings. the Honble Apex Cou:.'t held as fo llorvs:}

¶325

"We are of the vielv that it .var, not permissible for the lligl-r Court to go into^',he question of title in revieu' procee 1ings. Accordinp,ly,^r,nre set aside the impugned orrler but leave it open to the parties to rai se all questions relating to their respective title in appropria te proceedings in acr:ordance with 1ar.l,.

¶326

The appeals are accordingly dispos:d ol. No co sts. ''

¶327

Bv folloii'ing the judgment of Division Ilerch clated 03.12.2010 in 215 of 2OO2 & batch, which rvas assailed belore the Hcnble Supreme Court, one \4ohd Yousuf. President of N/.anaging Committee ol thc Alanrgili Masjid,

¶328

ARR..J WI']s 19424 l0l l& barch

¶329

Eidgah & Graveyard, Guttala Begumpet Vi11age, appointed by the AP Waqf Board filed civil suit in OS No.745/2016 (old OS.No.68 o12015) under Section 6(1) and section 83(2) ol the Waqf Act, 1995 and scction 26 read r.lith Order 7 Rulc 1 ol CPC, rvhich is pending lor tria1. Telangana State Waqf Board (for short 'TSWB) by follou,ing the orders of the FIon'ble Supreme Court dated 09.O1.2017 relerred to above issued notiflcation dated 13.O4.2O17 published in DC I5.04.2017 purported to be undcr Sectior-r 40 of t1-re Waqf ,\c1., 1995 dcclaring its intention to notlly the schedule llroperties^{as Waqf and called lor objections if any from the} general public. 1n pursuarnce to the said notification, pctjtioners herein ar-rd othr:rs irave submitted objections by r,vay of representations and same were rejected vide Memo F.No.21iLa(a)/RR/2016, dated 16.01.2018 holding that lhe vendors of the petitioners, objectors and their predecessors in title in question are not having valid title to alicnate the land claimed by the petitioners and objectors Thereafter, the TSWB through re solution dated 25.11.2O17 declared the :subject property as Waqf property by issuing impugned gazette notilication datcd l9.OL2O 18 published on 08.02.20I B clr:claring thr: subject propertJ* AS Waqt l)r'opcrt,^{and aiso rssucd anothcr GazcttcnotificaLion dated} 19.02.2O1 8 published on 22.02.2018 since the notification dated i8.02.2018 was found to be incomplete issued by the

¶330

TSWB. Challr:r-ging tl-re same, petitioners lilec 11rc'se u,rit petitions.

¶331

Commcn counter affidavit is filed bv the 3*1 respondent-the Telangana State Waqf Board Jenving the averments in the affidavits fi1ed in support ol the rn'rit petitions stati^.rg that the land admeasurin;1 r\cs.90. 17 guntas, situiite d in Guttala- Begumpct. R.F:. t)istrict in Sy.Nos.1 to 9 r,r,as notilied as Waqf propert'. origir-rer11r, published in^.rP Gazcttc on 29.02.1988 ancl thr samc is registered uncle r the book of Endou,ments at rriEle No. I 17 at Serial No.4L as ordered in file No.44lN41/RI?/i987 by the AP State \i/aqf Board. A Waqf Naama u,as t:xecuted in the year 1959 and one Mirza Khasim Saheb wes e. recorcled pattadar as per Sethwar of 1958 & 1960 of the village. But his name war; struck down without any arrlhoritv zurd name of Ms.D.Costa was eritered in the place of Khasim Saheb, whicli is a manipulation in s,)th\.ar and subsequentlf in Revenue Records. Mrrza Klrersirn Saheb executed a T<x,',4iyat Naama in favour of Shirik Imam as Muthavalli in the year 1967, who in turn constituted a committee hcaded by one Sri Abdul Khadar rrrcl the s:ricl Abdul Khadar liled an application lor rcgistrrtion of said property as .[aqf property in the year 1977 under Section 25 of the \/acif Act, 1954. Subsequently, A.o.State Waqf Board issued notification which was publ sl-r,:d in AP

¶332

A ItIt.J WI,s 19.124 2017& batch

¶333

¶334

(iazette on 29.O2.1988 after fol1ou,ing due procedure. Takir-ig unduc advantage of mar-ripulated and unauthorized entries of the name of Ms.D.Costa in the sethwar and Revenue Records by rounding off the original name of Sri Khasim Saheb, one Mr. Col. Cox claiming himself to be nephew of late of Miss. D.Costa, sold the above iand in lai,our ol one Sri B.Ilamd ingcsr,l,ar Rao, under registered sale deed No.218/ 1963, datecl 08.05.1963, after obtaining pefmissions under sections 47 and 48 of the Tenancy Act, 1950. The said Sri B.Ramalingeshwar Rao in turn gifted the subject land through al unregistered gilt deed dated 05 I 0. I973 in favoLrr of the Flyderabad Archdiocese Socictv. Arcl-r-I3ishop House arl Secunderabad, through its (l l)A l-lolde rs. Thc Socicly has filed de claration belore t he I-and Relbrms Tribunal as CC No.2379/KEN/75 and transler of the said proper:ty had been admitted by the MRO and that it had been excluded from the holding of Sri B.Ramalingeshwar Rao, in the Land Reforms proceeding.

¶335

i 1 . While things stood thus, the Waqf Board liied suit in^()S No.45 o1' 199'1 on lhc lile ol'Sub-ordinate Judgc, Ranga Redd-v DisLrict. seeking permanent injunction argainst the said Society and others. The Waql Board^also liled a Land Grabbing Case No.15111996 against the^said Society and others. The other respondents in the said^LGC

¶336

\ l's I^.)l ll l0 l'& batclr

¶337

also filed application No.155 of 1996 againrt the Waqf Board claimingi the subject property as their o^n.

¶338

As per the orders of the Honble Sultreme Court dated 09.01.2t)17 in CC Nos.19119-1912212( 15 and SLP (C) No.21835-:2184512O16, in CA No.268 278/'2(t17. Waqf Board has conducted enquiry calling for cletims and objections fronr the persons interested in the :;trbject 1artd, as contemplat,:d under Section 40 of the Wa11' .\ct. 1945 and issued fi-esh Gazette Notification No.6 on Ct8.02.2018. As the sarie -rs not bearing full details ol the^,:zrse, again a detailed notifi,:ation No.25 u,as issued on 2.2.O2.2O18. rejecting the c:laim of the petitioners and sarne u,as also justified by re:terating the reasons arld facts :orLtained in thc Memo dat,:d 16.01.2Oi8. After the petitioners having failr:cl to establish their claims belore the Waql Board, filed prcscnt u,rit lr,:titions on [limsy grounds on l,he plea ol jurisdiction o1 the 1., respondent in issuinq rmpugnecl notilications under Section 40 of 1945 r\ct :rrrci scrugl'rt lbr' dismissal of the nrit petitions.

¶339

Pending the above writ petitions, this Ccurt granted interim orders dated 07 .O2.2O19 in I.A.N o. I of WP Nos.2328 and 2327 of 201.9 suspending the op,:ration of the impugned notifications 18.02.2018 and 22.O2.2018 Challenging tlLr: said proceedings dated 07.0i).2r1 19, Writ

¶340

¶341

ARR.J WPs 19,]24 201 7& batch

¶342

Appeal Nos.96 and 118 are liled by TSWB and same nere

¶343

disposed of by the Division Bench holding as follows:

¶344

"4, In the aforesaid r,iew of thc matter, u,e order these Writ Appcals clirecting tl.rat arll tl're Writ Petitions cllptioned hercinabove shall bc listed collectively before thc lc:rrncd Sing)e Judgc- ftrr considering lor bcing prc>cceded u ith rn thc Iines u,hich u.e have indicated hereinabove. It is clarified that the iearned Single Judge m aL1' proceed u,it h the matte r as may be deemed appropriate; either by moulding the interlocuLory orders and granting or refusing applications lor interlocutory relief; or, having all matters finally heard, subject to the convenience of the Court. We hope and trust that this endeavour would be carried out within a period of three (3) 3 u,eeks from now. The orders impugned in these appeals u,ould, until then, be treated as ad interim. They are modilied to that extent.

¶345

The Wnt Appeals are ordered accordingly.

¶346

Post t.he r.r'rit pctitions i.e., W.P.Nos.19424 of 2017, 3 140. 3165, I 1048, i 1072, ) 1375 and 41502 ot 2018 on 07.03.20 [9, bclore the learned single Judgc,"

¶347

Thereafter, ,rit petition No.13094 ol 2Ol9 is liled on 27.06.2O19. Basing on the interim orders passed by the learned Single Judge in WP Nos.2328 & 2327 of 2019, interim orders were granted in W P No.13094 ol 2019

¶348

Learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing lor Waqf Board brought to the notice of this Court about the orders passed in W.A.Nos.96 and 118 of 2019, as such, all these writ petitions are listed together in terms ol the orders of the Writ Appeal Nos.96 & 118 of 2019 dated 01.03.2019.

¶349

When the mitlte rs wc)rc listed, iearned counsels for tl.rc l.rctitioncrs as u'cll as Sri D.V.Sitarama Murthy, learned Schirr; Counscl appcaring lor learned Standing Counsel for

¶350

\'l'5 lr..l.l{ l0l1& halch

¶351

Waql Board su lrmittecl that thc errgumclrts in t: tct locL-tton' applications as; n,e1l as main writ petitions are olre and thc same, as suci:, requested for disposal of writ^pe titions to bring quietus to the iitigation. In vieu, of the siune, Writ Petitions are b:ing taken up and disposed ol b',' uav ol this Common Orde:'.

¶352

Learnecl Senior Counsels for the pc -itiorrcrs Sri S.Niranjan Recldy, Sri P.Venugopal, Sri V. Fl:rnrakrishna Reddy, Sri T.\z.Kalyan Singh, Sri M.Srikanth, lri P.Venkat Reddy, Sri B.Raju, Sri P.Raghavendra Rao and Sri Avinash Desai, submit that though the Hon'ble Apex Crrrrt granted liberty lor iss;rrance of notilication, but th: impugned notifications iu'e issucd in violation of th,r procedure envisaged undtr the provisions of the Waqf Ac :urd also in contravention of the directions of the Hon t,le Supreme Court in SLP (il) arising out of CC Nos.19l19-191'2212015 and SLP (C) No.21835-2184512016, in Cr\ Nos.26827812017, drited 09.01.2017. They lurther submit that the respondent Board cannot be a^judge in it s oun casc, that too alter losing earlier litigation in rcsl>trcL ol title. Thel- also sulrmit that no surve,' \r:as r:i.nducted als envisaged unde'r Sections 4 & 5 of the Act of 1995. Since the impugned notification is issued in violirticn of the procedure con'-emplated under the Act and also in violation of the orders of the Honble Supreme Courl . the u'rit

¶353

ARR..] WPs 19424 201 7& batch

¶354

¶355

petitions are maintainable. 1'hey lurther submit that the

¶356

nurmes ol the pre decessors-in - t,it,le ol the petitioners have been entered in revenue records from the year 1954 and also in khasra pahani and that it is document of title, as such, the sarne cannot be disturbed at this length of time. In support ol their contentions, they relied on the judgments re ported in Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District v. D.Narsing Rao1, Gosula Ramulu v. A.P.WaqfBoard, Hyderabad2, Government of Andhra Pradesh v. Thumala Krishna Rao3 also orders in WP No.33133/2O\4, 22916. He further submits that the juclgment relied on by the learned Senior Counsel D.V.Sitarama N4urth1, ln the case of D,Venkata Krishna Rao v Gr:;vernment of Andhra Pradesha,^js renderccl basing on t hc judgmcnt ol tl-r<: Surprcrnc Court reported in thc c:rse of W.B.WaqfBord v. Anis Fatma Begums, but the same is considercd b1' the Flon'ble Supreme Court in Bhanwar Lal v. Rajasthan Board of Muslim WakF, but u,as not approved, as such, no longer good lau..

¶357

On the other hand, Sri D.V.Sitarama Murthy, learned Sr:nior Counsel appe aring lor respondent-WaqfBoard subnrits that under Section 40 of the Waqf Ac1., 1995, the

¶358

1l0li1^{3 SuprenrcCoultCase:695} l0 r7^(5)At.r) 193

¶359

' ( l98l) I Suprcnrc CoLrl C'rses ll,1

¶360

t(l[^(.r) ALI) t]l^(Dl]) LtiJr0l 1.1 sc( 583 2i)lll)ALD6i(SC) ' il0 l1) i6 SCC j l

¶361

Waqf Board can itsell coliect information with r,:gard to any W;rqf Propertr'. ri'hich it 1-ras reason to bclieve tc bc \Vaql Property. He submits that the said pou,er 11' thc Waqf Board is 11()t subordinate to thc po\'er o the St:rte Government under Section 4. FIe lurther subrnits that Section 40(3) contains a non-obstante cl tus;e r,r,hich overrides othe r provisions in the Act, thereb ; trnder the said provision, the Waqf Board rnay hold an erLcluiry and if it is satisfied that a property is Waqf Propertv. it can issue notice and the:n register it under Section 36. I-[<: further submits thal 1or issuing the irnpugned errata nc tilication. al there is no r: ccessitl, for the Gove rnment r l irllpoint second Survcv Commissioner to submit report In support of his contention, he relied on the^judgment re portcd in D.Venkata Krishna Rao v. Government of Anrthra Pradcsh (supra). He fi-rrther submits that the CtrO has arrlhoritv to issue the irr.rugncd notification since thc \'zLql l3oard passed a resolution No.304/2017 dated 2-.ll.2Ol7 unanimousl-u* resolving to declare the subject property as Waqf Propert),. He submits that the impugned notifications are as per the ,lirections of the Honble Suprerre^,3ourt and also as per the provisions of the Act. He furthe r submits that the findirrgs of the Land Crabbing Court lraLvc bc:cn set aside by the ttivision Bench in WA No.215 ol'2OO'.2 & bat<:h, dated 03.12.'.201O, which is confirmed by the Hon'ble

¶362

f-i

¶363

ARR.J V'/Ps 19424 2011& batch

¶364

Supreme Court in CC Nos.l9ll9-19722 l2Ol5 with Civil Appeal Nos.268-278 of 2017, vide order dated 09.01.2017. He lurther argued that sine the order of Division Bench in W.A.Nos.215 of 2OO2 & batch merged with the order of the r,l'hich I Iorr'blc Suprcn.rc Court dated 09.O1.2O17 , spr:c:i1'rr:al11' directcd tl-re par-ties to approach the approprrate lorum in appropriate proceedings for declaration ol title, the linding of the Division Bench r,r,ould be of no assistance to thc petitior-rers. He lurther submits that in view of the constitution of Waql Tribunal under Section 83 of the Waqf Act, the petitioners have efficacious and a-lternate remedy bcfbrc thc Waqf Tribunal, as such, writ petitions are not maintainable.

¶365

I B. I n vieu, of riva-1 conten tions of both parties, the issurcs that arise lor consideration in these u,rit petitiorrs are as under:

¶366

Whether the lvrit petitions filed challenging the impugned gazcttc notifications Nos.6 and 25, dated 08.02.20 I8 ar.rd 22.O2.2O 1B respectively, issued b1' the responder'rt Board under Section 40 of the Act, notifying the subject property as WaqfProperty are maintainable?

¶367

Whether the impugned Gazette Notification Nos.6 and 25, dated 08.02.2018 and 22.02.2018 respectively issued by the respondent Waqf Board ,. are in accordance with the orders of the Hon'ble

¶368

Supreme Court dated 19.O1.201.7 ir-r SLP No;.1t)¹ 1919122 of 20 I 5 or not ?

¶369

Wheth:r the respondent Waqf Board is errtitLed to issue im;,qgned notifications under Section 10 cl the Act?

¶370

Issue l'trr>s. 1 to 3:

¶371

The Hon'ble Apex Court while setting ar;idt: the order dated 18.04.:2016 in review petitions bearirg Nos.WAMP No.2394 & 2136 of 2OL1 in WP No.215 of i'.OO2 & batch conlirmed the orders ol this Court dated t,3..2.2010 in Writ Appeal Nos.215, 578, 625 of 2OO2 &" Writ Petition No.26553 ot 2003 and CCNo.4O|l2OO8. T]:e Division Bench of this Court in the aloresaid Writ r\ppr:irl obscrvr:d as follou,s:

¶372

"Suffice it to say that the Waqf Board faiied tc, r'stablish the elemr::rt of land grabbing to invoke the^jur sdiction for their evic tion; therefore, thc parties are at lib( rt], to $'orl( out their lemedies with regard to declaration rf thcir titlc to the pr1)perty in an appropriate Forum. Tl^c:eiorc, thc findings recorded by the Land Grabbing Cour t cirnnot be upheld,^'l'he title of either parties will be sL bj ect to declarati,rn made by a competent court ir.r ir properll' constituted suit and othcr proceeding."

¶373

After c'rrrlirming the orders of thc Divis or-r lJcnch. 1hc Hon'ble Ape>< Court has further observed thzrt ii is open to the authorities to issue any fresh notification in accordance r,l'ith lau,.

¶374

Adrn ltedly, the impugned notilicatior)s 'l'ere issucd in exercisc cl power under Section 40 of the ..\cL ol 1995. ,\

¶375

¶376

\ Ps l9.1l l l0 I l& hatch

¶377

pl:rirr rcadirrq of Scctrorr 40 ol []'rc ,\t:t go<:s to shou, that it d<rcs not colrlcmplelLc publication o1' any G.azcLL<:.^'lhe pr-rblication ol gazettc is or-riy c,nvisaged under Section 4 (l ) and (6) and 5(2) o[ thc Ac1.. Iror thc sakc ol convenience,

¶378

Ihr: sami: ?lrc oxtract('cl lt c lc r-r n <.lc r':

¶379

"'1. I)r't'Iiminar-\ srIr,( ' ol iarr<1:.risl

¶380

())^'J'lrc Stlrtr (iorcrrinr('ll nril. itr, rtotilicatirtn ir.r tht. ()llir:r:,rl (ilizL llr'. iil)p(li'tl lr;r' lltc Statc a Survcr (lornnrissiorrcr of Arrrlirls :,rrtd ;rs mzrnr- Additional or Assistanl SLtrvcr'^{(jornmissjoncrs} ol Auqat.s als mav l)r: ncr:r'ssi rrv lbr t hc pu rposc ol miiking a survcy of ;r r-rqu l- in lh( St:.rtc.

¶381

(61 tlrc Stalc^(iovcrnmcnt nr;rr', b, nol.ilicat.ion in the Ollir:ial^(lazotlc dircct thc Survcy Oommissionr.:r 1o ntakr: a sccond or srrllsc<1ut:n1 slrrvcv ol rvaql propcrtie s in thc Sratc anci thc provisions of sub scctions (2), (3), (4) and {5) shall :rpplv to such survcv as thcv applv to ar sLlr'av dirr:i:tcd undcr sub-section (r)

¶382

l)rovrdcci lhrrL rro such sccond or subscquenl survcy shlll brr mzrdr' Lrnlil thc cxpin oi;r pcriod of tcn vcars lrom thr: dzlt. on^,,r,hich thc report in relation to the imnrcdiately irrc:vir>us srrr/c, \'as submitted under sub scr:t ion (i3):

¶383

l)ror iclccl li.rrlhcr^t h:rt t he rvaql' properties already nolilicd sh:rll not bc rr:vir:r|cd again in subsequcnl. sLlrvc\ cxc('p1 r."herc thc slatus ol sLrch propcrtv has b<:cn changctl in accordance r'r'it h thc provisions ol anv l;trr."

¶384

:). I)rIi)Ii('iII ri)r; ol iist ol liiu(l,ri'l {1 )^()rr rc ct:ipt ol a r-( l)oIr Lnl(l( r'^.,Lrlr stCitoL I ll o1- s( clloll 4, t.lrt Stalc (io( r-nln( 11 sir,ill iolu;r'ri r t olrt ol lllc samc to thc llrrirrrl {l)^'l lrr i}r-ri,rrri sh;rll Irlrnint' thc r('porl forrr':rrclccl lo il Lrrd( r strlr st r:tion {l ) :.rr.rd 5 {lordu'ard it ir;rck lo llr('^{(lo\crnnrcttt} rt:tititt ;r pcriod r.rl six r'r'ronllrs lirr' pLrlrlir';rtior-r in tlti'^{(lllii:iirl ()t,rzcttcl} zr list^rtl' SLurni^,1 l:itrilrrii or Shirr.l auclail lrr thc Statc, u,hctttcr irr t:xrstcnct irl thc c()rltrlt( rt(t(rme t.l1 ol this Acl or co:]rirrg intO cxrstc-ncc Lit(rrcall(r r, tO^u hich Lhc rcport r('lil1cs. ar'rd^{( (lnlaininq} such othcr^particulars as^mal bc prcscribcd.6l(3) Thc rcvcnuc altl.horities shall-⁽ⁱ⁾ includc thc- list of eiuqal rt:fcrrr:d 1o in sub-section^(2), r,r'hilr: r.rpdatinq titc Iitnd rcr:ords; r'ir-rd⁽ⁱⁱ⁾ takc^into <'r;r.rsidr:rzrtiorr rhc list ol itrtrlal^rcfr:rrcd lo^insub s( cti()n 1.1), u hilc clr:cir.lrrrg lrlllzitionⁱⁿ thc^iand

¶385

\, .,^- I ' ,l ,\ ',r'r l

¶386

records. i4)^'l'hc Statc^{(;ovcrnrncrrt} sirall r t:rirrtain a recorcl of thc Lists publishrcd rtrtdcr sub :,ct lion⁽²⁾ from trme to timc. ]

¶387

I)c:rsion il ir propcr'Li is ls aclli propcrt-\ 1 )^'l'llc |loard may itsclI collcct ir:formrttion rt'gartling a:.tr' propcr:1, r.r'hir:h it has rcirson tr; l>ciicvc to t r: 1 rr aqf l propcrt.,, and il' anv q(.rostion arist:s r"hc ht:r a parLicr-Llar propcltl rs 1 lr,r'aq1'] llropcrt' rr not or whethr:r a 1 frvaqf] is a Sunni 1 lu,.rqll or a Shia 1 lr,r,aql],^{iL m:r-1} ,^{:rltcr rrirrkingsr-rr:lr inqltirr :rs i1 rn:rl} clr:cnr liL, clcciclc thc r1ur.'stiot.r. (-)j^'l'ht: clc,-:rsion rrl thc lloarcl rrn a qucstir-ln lrrtcler sLrb scctiolt (1) slrall, rrnle ss rcvokccl or rnoclilicd bl tlrc^'l'rilruni,r b:^ linal. {3)^{Wh-rc lhe IJoarcihars zrn-r' r(:rson to bclicrcLhat arrr} propor'r-\ ol atnY trust ()r s,-rr iut) t-cgisl':t cd rn pursuuince ol the lr-rcliarr^'l'rLlsts Act. 1882 (2 o' 1882) (,r uir(l('r thc Socittir':i iicgistrirtron ;\r:1. l[]:rLJ 1.2 I ol 186;C1 r: L..Lnclcl ilrr()th('i r(:1. is i irracll'i p1'ol)Lr:'t. ill(' lJoard rnar nol\ ithstiin(ln'lg :ur\ tlrurg r:orilrri rL:c1 rrr suclr^i,ct. hoicl an irrrlrr; r irt rcqir:cl lo su( r llr'ol)crt\ arrrl L1 ;rfter sutir irr<lrrrrr tlrt' lJoi,r-ri is s:rt slicrl tirirt sLtcl.l ir-opcrl\ r: 1 rr ar1l-l I)rol)( r 1, . i iili rrlton thc lr-lsl ()t s(,CicL-. irs llrr' (iLS( r)li)\ ltt. r;lltCr lrr r|risir r sttt lr pl-olj(Ii\ LtilCl|t '.irs ;\r 1 ,rs I rt,rr l 111r1111 11,. ot sltO\ c':tLtsr r,.hr sltr'1t prr.,pcllr slr;lrlrl rtot l)L' s() :-r. gjsl('lr'(l I)rovrdcd rhat in iLIl sttclt cast:s. rtolicc ol-lhc ilctrr)n propo-sccl to bc takcrr uncl('r this sLrb'scction shall bc gi,,'r]n o thc autLiorit! b., r,r,hOnt th(' trllst or s,)cict\ had br:en registorcd. (4)^'l'hr: lirard sha11, altrrr cluh, consrd:ring sLlch ca..us(: as ma-v be iho,,^,n ln pursu.ince ol noticc issucrl r.rndc'r sub scctio:r (ll). ptrss sr-tch ordcrs as rt rnatl tlrink tiL irr.rd thc ordcl so maclc by the tsoard, shall [.rc [inal, unless it is r cr cked or modilir:d bv a't'ribunal l'

¶388

As pcr thc schcmc oI thc W'aqf Act. thc St:rtc (lor.'crnmcnt is cmpowcrcd rnclcr Sr:r:tior-r z1 to iLppolnt :t Survcy Cornnrissioncr o1' ALl(lal to rnirl<r: a sLir.:c-\ of'ALr(,iaf in the Statr: ar:-irl thr: saicl^{(-ornmissiurror} has to submil a rcport aftor cnquir-\ . 'l'1tis l'ol)ort of :ltc Sut-r cr (lomrnissioncr is to br: loru zrrclr:t1 br thc Startc (.,o,'crrlrrl('nt to thr: Waql l3oard unclct Scr:trorr t(1) ol tl-rc :aic .\c1. Ll')c Wtrcll llozrrd \'1 Ithcn cxilrllln(' lllc re ylrlt Lltl(lcr sLlb,scctlolt (2) oi Scction :; and foru,i-rlrl iL iti.rr:k to tltc (lor ct rrrncnt fot-

¶389

\ltR l \ l': l') 1) I l0 I i& h. elr

¶390

l')

¶391

publjcation in thc^(lazcttc ol Iist oI Auqaf. This goes t<t shor.l' that elaborate cnquiry is contemplated for issuanct: of notif ication. T1-rc IIon'blc ,,\pr:x CoL;r1 grantcd libcrtl, t<t rssuc lrcsh notilicaLion in ar:cordancc \'i1h law. but not lor 1:rking any clccision Lrndcr Sc'ction 40 ol'the Act, as such. thc inrpugnccl^(iaz<'ttc notrlicrrtion is in violat.ion <>l the slatuc as u'cll .rs thc ordcr of IJonblc Suprcme Court. The i lon'bli' Sr:1tn'r'rrc^(lorrr'1 nr:r,cr irutholizccl thu rcspor-rdc'nt. \'arc1l-lloald to t.tkc a rlcr:ision rlrrcl<r- scctior-'r 4O ol thr: i\cl.

¶392

21 ,\il tht' alrovr' iircLs go to slrou' tiri-rt thc b<>th partir:s lralc to g('1 tll('n litlr. ticcl:,rll'cl^jn:rn iillpropn:r1r: Iiorum, Ir-t tht' rnslant <:trst. Ll,r ir'sl)oilil{ r'r t iJi;ii|ri uithrrlrt gctlir)g its t.i1lc rlc<:larccl in an ztI.)l)r'oprialc IiorLur, by cxt'rcising Iro\'ur' urrclr'r' Sr:ction^.{0 o1'tlrt: .\c1 . ir;sr-rccj irnpugned notilications. II;l'ing lost in thc Irtigartion, tirc rcspon dcnt.-Waqf l3o;rrd should not h:r,c cxt:r'crscd its jr-rrisdiction undcr sc<;tion 4O o1'thc Act. i lric:lr is sr,nrmllr'' irr nntLirc. to dc<:larc its titlc. Illsirorrrlcnt lJoitr-rl t.lirtr)()l {)ncL' itgairr sit rrt appcal ovt:r- tltc dccision of t hc I)ivision Ilcncl'r ol this Court datcd 0.1.12.-l(llO. iis conf irnrccl irr'1lrc IIon'lrlc Suprcmc^(lourt bv rl,al o1' sLrtrllleir'.' pr-t.,ct;11urc unclcr- Scr:t ion 40 o1 thc Act. l'hc IIon'blc ,.\1-rcx^(lourt in Thummala Krishna Rao (supra) lrclrl tlrirt lric ts rthji lt |lI I S( ,1 lrona lic,lc dispL-r t c ol litlc lrr:trii:r:n thi:^{(lovr'r'rlrll('r)l} ittrrl llrt: occupanl must be

¶393

' i L\ ',1:i ll

¶394

adjudicated upon b5 tlrr: ordinzrr)' coLrrts of la.'r'.^'l'hc (iovernment ca-lnot dccrdr: sr-rt:h qucstions un latcrail,v in its own favour and evict any pcrson surnmarily t,n 1hc basis oI such dccisio^'r. Duration o1' occupertion is a so rclur':rrrt alrd that a pcrsoll in or,'ci.rpaliurr ftrr a ior-rg t lr-rc can bc takcn, prirnct f r,tc;e. to harvt: a l-lon:r ficlc clirirrr to thc propclt.,v rcrluiring an rrillal lj:rl rri1.jl:rIir:irtiorr ircc:orrliirg t() l1r,r cst:r blisl-rccl pror:,.'clulr: oL iau

¶395

2.)_ Thal irpart. onc Nlohd Yoilsul'. l)rt:si,1cr I o1' 11r<: N4anaging Cor-n littcc ol i\1rl:igiri Mosrlr-rr:.^(lrtrvrr arcl arnd tridgah, appoinrcd bv 1hc rr,'sponricnt lloi,rr'<l . tr.r lrr.irsuzrLir:c of tlic ord<:rs ol thc i)ivi:;ron lJc:nr;h in W,\ Nri,c..l1o ol 2002 l, batch cl:rtctl Oi'r.l)../.t)1O. liiiri r:rrri :.irit \o.7:1 l of 7Ol(r (Ol11 OS.No.5F rl .101 ,.) 1':;i .ll, l:ri:.it:rr oi srrlr jr r:1 p.;r'1ri;q'1'11' iis Wakf. t'ccr',i,.:r y ol pol;scssion. cor',sr(lLlct-itia I prcrpct u:.rl injunction. arnd samc is pclr,irr"trl bt:Iil-r: ti-rc WiL,li^{'.'ribi.rital.} Ti-rrr onl,v barsis ltrr issr,ring rnipuLgrrt'ri^()ttzcllr.: noltficatiorrs is thai thr: p1-ol-)('t t.\ \:rs t'ttt-19r,, r'cl 1r'. 1\l6gir1 i:t1p1i'6r Auiangzcb, bLtl 1-lou l vr,'r'. ilo 1r('\ (l\ti1(llC( ,,;li p r oclu cccl nor iln,' nuitrri i:rl is rclilcl itn lrr iltL, l'r's1:,o:,ilr'nL \'irr1l' i3oarcL, 111 lhr: rnltrigncri ltoilliCat.l()n-s. cx( CI)t ;Cil st rr iitq statcmcnts, u lrich wi:r: r<:jr:ctcd b,r,' tirc Division llcnch of lhis^(lourl in tts orc'lcr dartr:d Oil.l:2.2010 in ,'r\ No.215 l2OO2^{& batcl'r at point No.ll, hcld as lollou,s}

¶396

\ t( lr..1 \l lr..⁽⁾ ll.l l0l^',t ),rt!lr

¶397

"'l'ltr' plcirclirtgs. ;rs rL li'rrcrl lo, ln (t\1(.nsor, arc: thc Wetql lloirrrl rs clirirnilg lllL' t)rr)l)(,rtv st:lliltp thetl Mogul I'lntltt t-r,r' ,,\tn-lrrg,.,r 1t qillcLl llr, :r;;irlitirLion sr'lrr,rllrlc l)roJlCrlillra] l]r(sIl( ( (--ssr'(rllle rsnraintainCd lhe s;]l.r('li1\ ol tlrc Wirrli.l)ll1 nol f-ilIrl tr I'rr rloCumcnt shou'ing iirc erit ol riltptlir:ittron scltcciulc propcrt'. Accordirrg to Lhe cvirlt'rrr:c: ol i).W'.1. rlrc gitt ol' thc ;rltltlicartion scttr:dulc llropcrlv^{is:rntrr:rl onr: and AlamqiriMosquc was} constn..rctccl during t.hc pcriod ol Aurarrgazeb, but Lherc is r.ro c:viclcncc ro cslablish that thc mosqLtc was constructcd during thc: regimr: ol Aur:rngzrszeb and it was ca lle d as Alarngiri l\4r.rsquc."

¶398

It is also to bc notc<l that thc Sub-Divisional Magjstratc rr-i his pr'occc(lings ri:.r1r'rl 23. I l. l()88 itn(l procccclings daLccl 0,3.02. l9c)I>. issr-rt:ri un(ior Suction 1,1 I (lr.l).C trolding that thclr: u'as onlv ir riil:rpiclatccl moscluc rn Survr:_y No.7 it-t all cxtonI o1'0.34 scl.vds. Iiv(i11 t]-r<;urgh .rntple opportunit,V \'as grVCn to t.ht-- r'L-spori(iCn1 Wacll' Iloiircl to producc thc (Lo( illncrttitr\ r'r'irltir,'r ii) :jlio\' lir:rt thc sullcct larrd bclongs 1-o thc Wzrcl ii;rr' !losqLrc. no doLLrmcnts arc placctl ir-r sr-ri)l)o|t oJ'tlrIii t'l:rirr rrr<l Ilil(^()\cr' llrc l)ropcrt.. ln Dev Raj Teja Singhz, tlrr- ii:gl.r Court ol l)anjab & I{aryana l-rclci that noIif icatiorr rssucd b-y thc Warql Roard declaring thc prop(--rtv as Waql I)ropcrt_v citlrnot bc sustained, if thcrc is no cvidcrlcc tll' dt:tlrr:aIion in lavor-rl o1' Lhe Waqf t3oard :lr-rrl tirat Lht: notilir:irl^jon is nol conclusivc proof of titic ol Wacll [3oarrl.^'lhc lirrriirr;1 cl t]r( ,: :ili])g ol thc 1>ropcrl-t bv thc \Varll' iJr.rirltl is rrcrt'lt oil lll(' itir:;is ol notilit:arLit.rrt. is ('()n1r-:rr\ to lrrrr'. citlllr()i itC sutstltincd.

¶399

Sri D./.Sitaram:r N4urthr'. lcarr-rcd Sctt ot' Cor-Lrtscl, u,hiir: rr:1r,ir'1g ,rn tl-rr' .iuclgmcnt ol thr: llor-r'1;lc Supr<'rric Cor-rrt ir-r Kunhayammed v. State of Keralat c'ot-ttcntii'cl thart sincc thc itnltligrrt:r-1 tiotilicirtions itt'r: ts: ttr'al oir llrc libr:rtv gr.urtc(L 1x' tirc llon'1r1r' Sttplctt'ic^(lo.tlt in^(lrvi1 i\ppcals rch:r'r',:cl to sl.rprar- l.lrc sanrc is birrrlin3 on tlrr' partics and tlrerL thc 1r<:liLrr>n('l's callnoL contr rrrl thut lllc Board has no Iro\,or' 1.o issuc^.ruch rrotrllcartion:;, as sr-r<:h. thc said contcntion is l'rit br plincipir:s akin to rr.'s .jrtdirnt o. 24. li-i thc irrstzrrri it rs to llr: scurr tlrat^(trr: t{on'l-llc Supreme Cou'-t in CC No.19l l8-19122 ot 2015. datcd 09.01.20 I 7, rcfr:rrcd lo abovc. c:lcarl-r' obscrvcd as follou s

¶400

" l )clay con,l,rncd. Wc do nc,t scc anv gror.Lnr:l 1r, irrrcrlirrc u,ilh th: lincling rcr;orcled irv thc lligh Court ii!z,rl tirr-: NotificaI.ror-r ir.r urrr'stiorr r,vil s issttc,-l '\ i1ltoLr1 l-ollo,.l:rrg 1rrr,y-:r'r lrrocrtriltrc. 'l'hc sltcr:rrrl 1t:arr: pe:1i',rons ar'(' ir' (,ri(l)i.r1ri\ drsrr.r;ss l ll,rtrcrci. 11 \ijll lrt' r)D(ir t,r lhr' ;riiilrrrriti(.ii lo rr\it,' iln\ Jl-r'slt 'Io1i il t'irrIt ttt Li l ,i/IiiIr^{'1 ,,.'rI; l'1'r"}

¶401

'l'hurs. llrs (,orrr'1 1s r)ot goiirg inLo I'rt' r-i islt r,r i r-'cl qucslions of la. i on nrcrits of^tlir' ri'r;tltcr. bul rr thCSC \' t l)ctrlions llris^(louut is ,'lt'alin!, rrltlt iltr-' issrrl r,, l lthr:r ilrt' impr-rgr-rccl notLlications \:crc issucd irr tc^'1n j ol tltc provisions oi tht: i\ct or as pcr tirc dircctions o^' t f'(. Ilon blc Apttx Oourt ol- rtol . Srnlr: this⁽ L-rL,tr'1 is o1'tlrc oP 11isy11 i1111 impr-rgncd not licatiorr rs no1 irr ilccol-(lar.ltr l u ith iitc prooedurc cnl isagcci Llnclcr the provisions ol' t i-r<: Act i-rnd

¶402

¶403

ARR.J WPs 1941.1 2017& balch

¶404

dircction ol Ilonltlr:^.\pcx Court, altt:rnate remedy is not a bar ft>r cntcrtaining 1hc n'rit pctition. l{owever, it is open lor thc authoritics to 1a}<cr actiorl in:rccordance u,iLh 1ar.l.. 25 Lt:arnccl Sinslc .Iuclqc oI tir is^(-'ourt rvhile dealing u,ith 1l-rc plca ol allr'r'rratc r:nrcc1v unclcr thc vcn, samc cr)aclmcnt bv rclving on tho judgnrunt ol I Ior-r'blc Suprcme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Chhbil Dass Agarwale hcld as lirllorvs

¶405

"32.1n Commissioner of Income Tax v. Chhabil Dass Agarwal, thr: Suprcrlc Court hcld that if thcre is breach of natur.rl justice or pror:r:durr-' rr:quired lor rlccision has not bccn adoptcd, allcrnati'c r-crnedy is r.rol a i:ar. It also observed that r,r'hcn a statutor' ;rLrtlrrrritt, has not tri:tcrl ir.r accordance with thc prcivisior-rs {)l-^r'r:tatmcnL ur rllrt stior.r, in deliance ol lLrncl:Lrncnlirl prirrc l-.ir s oljLrrirr:ial proccclirrr. rrr ha s rcsrlrtcd to irrvokc pror isions ,ilrrclr arL' rr'1>caiccl. ilrcrr notu,ilhstanding cxistcr-ri'c ol alLcrnrrLrr t rcrnccl\ . tlrc I lieh Court Llndcr Arliclc 226 of thc^{(lonslrlririon} i:1-lr:rlrir^, ;lrt i r irlairr thc Writ lr)etition irncl grrrnt rt lic'l^'

¶406

-)-l;. I.rtlthcr'. llrt cir L isir.,rr in Anis Fatma Begum's (supra), s'as r:onsidcrccl bot h irr Bhanwar Lai's case (supra) and the bload proposition laic.l clorvn in Anis Fatma Begum's case, to thc cft'cc1 that all rnaltcrs pcrtairling 1o \,aqf should bc lilcd bclore tht: Waqf^'f rjbr-rnal onl' .lnd should not be cntcrtaincd bv thc civil Court or bv^t he IJigh Court under Arti<:lc 226 ctt' thc ConsLitr.rtior-r of lndia was not approved. Morcover, thc por.l,cr of^jrrdicial rcvicw has been held to form thc basic structurc ol ttre Constitution of India in scvcral dccisions ol thc IIon'blc Suprcme Court and that sllch powcr cannol ltc t:rtnl roilcil or cxclLldcd by any

¶407

\r i r,^.

¶408

\ t,. li)l \ n.rt!n

¶409

provisiorl of aur\ stat utc.^'I'hc: cxir:tcrrcrc of :t rcnr('dv Llncl(tr thc Waqf Act, I 1)95 cvcn il sucl-i romcd!' -'()(trs t he challenge to tl-rr: Gazi:ttc Notificartion, u ill not prcclud(' this (lourt lrom ct- tcrtait-t tt'tg :rItci rlccicl ing thc .tlrot'c u-rit pctrtions. (scc'^(iosula Ramulu v" A.P.lVaqf Board (supra)) 27. Undr:r Articlc 22-6 ol'Lhc r:onslrt.ution. thc Iieh^(lourt. having regard ,o thc fercts of Lhc casc, i-ras clrscr<:tton to entcrtain or noL to t:ntertair-r a writ pctitiorr. lJrrt r:xislcncc ol an alternatc rcmcdv is not an absolutc bar to r:,.rcrcrsr: ol jurisdiction un,ler Article 226 <tf thc Constitutron ol lndia. 'l'he rule of r::lraustiotr of ::lLcrnatr: r'crncclrr s i-t r,-rlc ol' discretion and not onc ol cornpulsion Ilut th,: rrrtcrnativc rcn-tr:dv haLs br:r:n corrsisl.cnth. hcld br thrs^{( (,.'-rrt} 11.)1 tr) opcrilte as a l-r;rr in :,rt 1c-:i.i.,t iirrt:c <:or-rlirrg,cncit s. rraml'i.t,. rvhcre thc rvrit l)etition has bccn ftcd lor the cn lor,:crncrrt o[' an-y ol thc Fundamcr-rtai li'ights or r,r,frcr<' thcrt hr-rs br.clr a violati<ln o1'llre ;.,rrncrp1cs o1'naturui justic:c r,r' ,ilrcrc lhc r-lrdr'r clr prr,, t cdirtgs ilf^(l u.holil ri'it lrout .jlr i'isrlrctior-r ()r authoritv hard lrurportccl to trsrr i-p .jurnsdir:tion'r'jt hor-rt 1r,sal foundation or patently crroncous or thc vrrcs o[ ar-r Act is challenged. (:;cr: Whirlpool Corpn. V. Regist:ar of Trade Markslo)

¶410

'l'hor-rgr Sri 1).V.Si1ararna \4'-rrthr'. 1c u'ncrl Scnior Counsel b,r rcl-r'ing on thr: jrldgrtrr:rrt of llus Court in "'1tooll 8^scr--' I r)( tr (6).,\l l)(,( ! )

¶411

¶412

AIiR..I W Ps M24 l() l 7& ba(ch

¶413

D.Venkata Krishna Rao's case (supra) and also in Anis Fatma Begum's case (supra) submits that in vieu, of altornativc romcdv bc-'lorc thc \,aqf tribunal , the writ pcLiti()ns arc l'lot. marinlainal.>lc, lrut Lhc said dccision lvas riol rtppro/cd br, thc llot-r'irlc Suprcrnr: Court in Bhanwar Lal's case (supra).

¶414

In vir:u ol irl;orro fircts anrl r:ircumsLances. the im;iugncd GaztlLc Notillcations Nos.6 (Itile

¶415

No.2 I /l-A(a)/RIr/201 5) and 25 (F'iic No.2l iLa(a)/RR/20L6) datcd 08.02 2018 and 22.O2.2O18 issueci by the

¶416

rcspondt:nt Waqf 13o:r rd arc sct asi<lc:, As a sequel thereto impr-rgncd rrotilicatirrn in [i]c No.23/1,4(a) lRRl2014, dated 13.04.20i7 :rnd Mcnrt.r rn i'iii: I'lo.21lt,a@)1RR12016, datcd 16.01 .201B, arc also sc1 a)iidc.

¶417

,,\ccordingli'. irll llrr:rr: u r:t irc'liLions arc allo'"lrr:cl to i.hir r::rlcr.rt irrciir:a1crl ,rlror r

¶418

Therc sh:rll bcr rio orclct' as Lo costs. As a sequel thclt:to, miscr:llirncolrs l)clitions. i1' r,tny', pcnriing in tl-rcse u'rit pt:ti1ions. shall sL:rrid closccl

¶419

Sd/. CH. VENKATESHWAR ASSIST GISTRAR //TRUE COPY//

¶420

ECTION OFFIGER

¶421

To, 1. The Chief Executive Officer,^Telangana State Wakf Board,^{Office at Haj House,} Razzack Manzil, Nampally,^Hyderabad

¶422

PTO

¶423

Iti

¶424

The Principal Se:retary, Ivlinority Welfare, Government of l elangana, State of Telangana, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3. The President, [Vanaging Committee, M/s. Alamgiri Masjid, Eidgah and Graveyard, At Guttala Begumpet Village, Serlingampally l/:ndal, Ranga Reddy District. 4. One CC to Sri T V. Kalyan Singh Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Sri S.R. l/ahajir, Advocate IOPUC] 6. One CC to Sri IV. Srikanth, Advocate [OPUC] 7, Two CCs to the^(lP for Social Welfare, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. (OU--) 8. One CC to Sri P Venkat Reddy, Advocate IOPUC] 9. Two CCs to the Advocate General, High Court for the State of^'felangana at Hyderabad. (OU--)

¶425

10.One CC to Sri. lV.A. l\4ujeeb, SC for Wakf Board [OPUC] 1 1. One CC to Sri. G.M. Mohiuddin, Advocate [OPUC] 12.One CC to Sri. B,)ggula Raju, Advocate [OPUC] 13.One CC to Sri. V Ramakrishna Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 14.One CC to Sri. P Raghavendra Rao, Advocate [OPUC] 15. One CC to Sri. A'rinash Desai, Advocate [OPUC] 1 6. Two CD Copies CHR

HIGH COURT

ARR,J

DATED:0710112.0120

COMMON ORDE R

, ilE $TA 14:
/r,."
({
21 f,Pii 2,D.0 ,1"2
6 *\c)
a+l
'(k .f/
-i-:-_:-==

¶432