Disposed

Mushahed Ali v. Sri M a K Mukheed

Telangana HC9 Jun 2025WP/15769/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging government order appointing a defeated election candidate as second Bar Council member of Telangana State Waqf Board. Court held member holds public office amenable to scrutiny, found appointment contrary to Section 14(1)(b)(iii) since no election was held, and directed government to re-examine the decision within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed directing respondent No.2 to re-examine G.O.Ms.No.10 dated 05.03.2024 and take appropriate action per Waqf Act, 1995 and Rules within four weeks; no costs.

Mushahed Ali Vs Sri M a K Mukheed — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

132s21

IN THE HIGH^{COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

MONDAY, THE NINTH^{DAYOF JUNE} TWO THOUSAND AND^TWENTYFIVE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE^{MRS JUSTICESUREPALLI NANDA}

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO:15^{769 0F 2024}

¶9

Between:

¶10

MushahedAli,aged38years.S/oSriMohdMahmoodAli,Occ;Advocate'R/oHNo 8-7-1 60/8,^{BowePallY,HYderabad.}

¶11

.....PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

1 Sri t\tl A K Mukheed,^{aged 60 years. S/o Sri S AWaheed OccAdvocate and} ili;;b;.'i;|";g;ni^{Siite wiqt Board,Rl/o Door N.o 3-4-4s3and 4e4 Flat} 'r.lJ r0i, iil f66i, Maa Gayatri'Plaza' Barkatpura, Hyderabad' Telangana.

¶14

2 The State of Telangana,^{rep by its Secretaryto Government of Telangana'} r,rri""niGi Welfare bepartnieni,^{Governmeniof Telangana, Secretariat'} Hyderabad.

¶15

3 The Telangana State^{Waqf Board,rep. by its ChieJExecutive Officer' Haj} HouSe. Ra2zak^{Manzil, Ndmpally, Hyderabad 500001'}

¶16

.....RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition Under Article^{226 of the constitutionof lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated^{in the affidavitfiled therewith' the High Courtmay be} pleased to issue a Writ or order^{preferablyin the nature of Wrrtof Quo Warranto} and consequently^{quash the impugned GO Ms No 10, Minorities Welfare (Esttll)} Department daled^{5t3124issued by the 2nd Respondent appointingthe 1st} Respondent as^{Member of Telangana State Waqf Board is whollywithout power} or^jurisdiction and^{contraryto law and unconstitutiona l'}

¶18

I.A.NO:1 OF 2024

¶19

PetitionUndersection.lslCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin the affidavit^{filed in support of the petition,the HighCourt may be pleasedto}

,t,

suspend impugned Proceedings/order^{GO Ms No.10,Mino'i ies welfare(Estt-ll)} Department dated^{5t3t24passed by 2nd Respondentperrt ing disposal of the} above writ^petition.

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioner :^{DRK.LAKSHMI NARASIMHA}

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent^{No.1: SRI G.MOHAN RAO,LE / RNED SENIOR} COUNSEL SRI KATIKA RAVINDER^REDDY

¶27

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent^{No.2 : SRIIMRAN KHAN, LEAF NEDADDITIONAL} ADVOGATE GENERAL

¶29

Counsel for the Respondent^{No.3: SRIA.M.QURESHI,LEl,lINEDSENIOR} COUNSEL SRI MIR IBRAHIM^{ALI KAMIL}

¶30

The Court made the following^ORDER

4,"

THE HON,BLE MRS. JUSTICE^{SUREPALLI NANDA}

¶38

w.P. o.15769 0F 2.)24

¶39

ORDER:

¶40

Heard Sri K.Lakshmi Narasimha,^{learned counsel} appearing on behalf of^{the petitioner,Sri Gandra Mohan Rao'} learned Senior designate^{counsel representing SriK'} Ravinder Reddy, learned counsel^{appearing on behalf of} Respondent No.1 on record, Sri^{lmran Khan, learned} Additionat Advocate General^{appearing onbehalf of} Respondent No.2 and Sri^A.M. Qureshi,^{learned senior} designated counsel appearing^{for Sri Mir IbrahimAli Kamil'} learned counsel on^{record for Respondent No.3'}

¶41

The Petitioner aoD ched he Cou seekino^Draver as

¶42

under:

¶43

"...to issue a Writ of order preferably^{in the nature of Writ of} Quo^{Warrantoand consequentlyquash theimpugned} G.O.Ms.No.10, Minorities^{Welfare (Estt-II)Departmentdated} 05.03.2024 issued by the^{2nd respondent appointingthe 1'r} respondent as Member of^{Telangana StateWaqf Boardis} wholly without^power or^{jurisdiction and contrary to law and} u nconstitu tion al and^{consequentlyquash the same as such} and to pass such other order..."

¶44

¶45

3 he ft Pe ti rl rt f the averments b h e 1()n he d t 2^r the oetitioner in SU DDort of the resent lrUrft_geUfuSn jg 3S_F_r rttours:

¶46

a) Petitioner is a Mlsl:nr and a prac:icing Advocate. Petitioner being interested in the well br ing and good administration of the Waof Board is a person interr sted in the waqf as deiined under. Section 3(k) cr the Waqf Act 1995

¶47

ii) It is the specific case of the petitioner that Govern!.nent vlde G.O.Ms.No.9 datecl Og.O2.2O2Z issued notification for Reconstitution of Telangana State \ryaqF Board anc :lso notified the Election Schedule. Consequ€nt upon thc said (; O.Ms.lJo.9, the Government reconstituted the Waqf Boarcl vide G.O Ms.No.25 dated 30.04.2022. Vide the said G.O.. Governm,: rt instead of reconstituting re Telangana State Waqf Board by,) even members/ reconstituted it with ten members. The 1,r i spondent filed W.P.No,12368 of 2022 chailenging G.O.Ms.No.25 de -ed 30.04.2022 whereunder one M.Zakeer tJussa:;r lar.,id had b(), n cleclared as elected i'or the post of l"4embe: of Telangana Sta:e Waqf BoarC

¶48

¶49

under the category^{of Section 14(1) (b) (iii) of the Waqf Act, 1995} as Muslim Member^{of the Bar Council'}

¶50

pe oner t State iii) It is further the^{case of the} Government had taken^{adecisiorl- and issued aMemo} No.2872lEstt-III2O23^{dated 07.LO.2023communicatingthe} decision to constitute^{the s/aqfBoard with 11 membersduly} including the 1't^{respondent,Member of the Bar Council' under} Section 14(lXbxiii)^{and aggrieved by the same petitionerfiled} W.P.No.2913B of^{2023and on the basis of the submission madeby} the learned counsel^{appearing on behalf of the 1tt respondent'} is Co vide ord a o .P 38 ol 2O23 obse^{rved as under:}

¶51

"Learned Government Pleader for^{Minority Welfare takesnotice} for respondent No.1.

¶52

Sri Abu Akram,^{learned StandingCounseltakes notice for} respondent No.2.

¶53

Sri K. Ravinder Reddy,^{learnedCounseloffers vakalaton behalf} of respondent^{No.3and waives serviceof further notice'}

¶54

Sri Hari Haran,^{learned Senior Counselappearing on behalf of} petitioner by drawing attention of^{this Court to the impugned memo} dated 07.10.2023^{would contend that while the State Govemment is} vested with the^{power underSection14(1Xb) of TheWaqfAct,1995} (for short'the Act') to have^{one and not more th;n two members from}

¶55

-. :.;:5:,Elie-:-.--i

¶56

¶57

¶58

the electoral colleges be elected as members o, :he Waqf Board and that the State Government in iLs wisdom, issur:< G.O:Ms.No.9 dated 09,02.2022 whereby it has been decided to hav r one member from the Electoral college under Clause (iii) of Sectio.r 14(1Xb) of the Act i.e., member from State Bar Council. Therefore t is contended that since the existing member was already elected, th( appointment of 3ra respondent is invalid.

¶59

Per ontra, Sri G. Mohan Rao, learned Senrc . Counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent by drawing attention rr this Court to the impugned proceeding would submit that the abo,a proceeding is only an in principle decision of the Government to r€ ( )nstitute the board under the category (iii) of section 14(1Xb) of th: Act, and the same would become effective only upon issuance of 3overnment Order (G.O.) under Section 14(8) of the Act by susperseJ ng the earlier G.Os issued.

¶60

Thus, it is contended that the impugned grr :ceeding does not confer any right on the 3'd respondent and the r ame is subject to issuance of G.O. by the State Government.

¶61

Learned Senior Counsel further submits that : ince the impugned proceeding is onry a decisron of the Government, th r respondent No.3 would not claim any benefit of the same or discharr e any functions of a member unless and until G.O. in this regard is is; red by respondent No. 1 in accordance with law.

¶62

The statements made by rearned senior cr,r nser on beharf of respondent No.3 is placed on record.

¶63

Learned Government pleader the responder s while adopting the submission of the learned Senior Counsel worrl I further subrnits

¶64

¶65

that since the State is empowered to reconstitute the board, the authority would follow due process of law while giving effect to the in principle decision.

¶66

In the light of the above submissions, this Court is of the view that the matter requires counters.

¶67

Accordingly, the respondents are directed to file their counter in the matter.

¶68

List after four weeks."

¶69

iv) It is fu rther the case of the D ationer that the l"t s on r ed th h Cou an an w.P. o.3478 of 2024 seekino oraver and in nm Draver as under:

¶70

writ tion is see fol

¶71

"To issue a Writ or Writs more appropriately a WNT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondent No.1 in not issuing the Govemment Order (G.O. ) as contemplated under Section 14(lxbxiii) of the WaK Act 1995 for the reconstitution of the Telangana State Wakf Board in pursuance to the Memo No.2g72lEsttIl/2023 dated 07 .t0.2073 as illegal, void, ultra virus, unconstihrtional and violations of the provisions of Waqf Act 1995 and also in violation of principles of Natural Justice in the interest of justice and equity and consequently to direct the 1( resporrdent to issue the Government Order (G.O.) as contemplated under Section 14(1xb)(iii) of the Waqf Act 1995 for the constitution of the Telangana State Waqf Board in pursuance to the Memo No.287ZlEstt-[ /2023 dated 07.LO.2OZ3."

¶72

¶73

Interim Praver in I.A.No.1 of 2024 i! W.P.No.3478 of

¶74

2O24 as hereunder:

¶75

"To direct the 1$ respondent to issue the 3overnment Order (G.O.) as contemplated under Section 14(1XbXi i of the WaK Act, 1995 for the constitution of the Telangana Sta e Wakf Board in pursuance to the Memo No.2872lEsft-II/2O23 lated 07.10.2023, pending disposal of the Writ Petition in the int,:r est of justice and equity."

¶76

And this Court vide its order dated 09.02,2(! 4 oassed orders tn I.A.No. ot 2024 in W.P.No.3478 ot 2l) 14 observinq as under:

¶77

"Notice before admission.

¶78

Leamed Govemment Pleader for Sociai We i re takes notice on behalf of respondent No.1.

¶79

Sri Abu Akam, learned Standing Counsel for WaK Board takes notice on behalf of respondent No.2.

¶80

There shall be interim direction as prayed frr Post on 11.03.2024."

¶81

v) It is further the case of the pet t oner that duly considering the interim orders of this Court c. ted 09.02.2024 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2024 in W.P.No.3478 of i( 24 Government issued G.O.Ms.tlo.10 dated 05.03.2024 rec )nstituting the Telangana State Waqf Board with eleventh memtr, r duly including

¶82

¶83

the 1st respondent i.e., Sri M.A.K. Mukheed, Advocate, High Court and Member of Bar Council as Member of Telangana State Waqf Board from the Bar Cor-rncil under category 1a (1) (b) (iii) of Waqf Act 1995, as amended in 2013.

¶84

vi) The writ petition filed by the petitioner vide W.P,No.29138 of 2023 was therefore dismissed as infructuous vide order of this Court dated 19.03.2024 passed in W.p.No.2913B of 2023.

¶85

Aggrieved by the same petitioner approached the Court by filing the present writ petition.

¶86

4| PE USED T E REC RD

¶87

(A) Order imouqned dated 05.O3.2O24 issued by the nd o ls a he nder

¶88

"GOVERNMENT OF TELANGANA ABSTRACT

¶89

.Yjlolti.r^{Welfare Department - Reconstitutionof TelanganaState} WaK Board under WaK Act, 1995 - Appointment of Sri M.A.K. Mukheed, Advocate, High Court of Telangana and Member of Bar Council as member of Telangana State Wakf Board from the Bar Council under the category 14 (1) (b) (iii) of Waqf Act, 1995 _ Notification - Orders - Issued.

¶90

MTNORITTTES WELFARE (ESTT-rr) DEPARTMENT

G.O.Ms.No,lo

Date^{j:05.03.2024.}

Rer < the following:-

¶95

WaqfAct, 1995 (ns amended, 2013)

¶96

G.O.Ms.No.25, Min. Wel (Eist-II) Dept., dl . 10.04.2022.

¶97

Govt. Memo. No. 2872lEsfr-Il I 2023, Dated :^I 7. I 0. 2023.

¶98

G.O.Ms.No.4, Min. Wel. (Estt-II) Dept., dt: t5.02.2024.

¶99

Interim orders of the Hon'ble High Court ir L.A.No.1 of 2024 dt. L9.02.2024 in W.P.No.3478/2024.

¶100

In the references 2d and 4h read above, Government have reconstituted Telangana State WaK Board, HyderiSad in exercise of the powers confened under Sub-Section (9) o' Section (i4) and Section (15) of the Waqf Act, 1995 (as amenc:d in 2013), and appointed Ten (10) Members out of which Six (ri Elected Members and Four (4) Nominated Members to the Telangan;r itate Waqf Board.

¶101

In the reference 3d read above, Governmer have reconstrtute the Board with Eleventh member duly appointing I ri M.A.K.Mukheed, Advocate and Council as Second member from 'l e category of Bar Council as per ffiion 14 (1) (b) (iii) of the ! rqf Act, 1995, as amended in 2013, as there were only two eligibl,: electors from that category to the Telangana State Waqf Board.

¶102

In the reference 4h read above, the Hor:le High Court in I.A.No.1 of 2024 in W.P.No.3478 of 2024 pray(:( to direct the 1n respondent (Secretary to Govt. M.W. Dept.) to is: r e the Government Order as contemplated under Section 14 (1) (b) (ii ) of the WaK Act, 1995 for the constitr.tion of the Telangana Stl e Wakf Board in pursuance to the Memo No.2872lEstt-II12023 c..07.10.2023. The Hon'ble High Court passed orders on L9.02.2024 .l at, "there shall be interim directions as prayed for".

¶103

Government after careful examination of the ratter and in view of the orders of the Hon'ble High Court 4th rearl above, hereby reconstitute the board with eleventh member duly i cluding Sri M.A.K. Mukheed Advocate of High Court and Member rf Bar Council as member of Telangana State Waqf Board from th,: Bar Council under Category 14 (1) (b) (iii) of WaK Act, 1995, as ame r ied in 2013.

¶104

¶105

NOTIFICATION

¶106

"In exercise of the^powers conferred^{under Sub-Section(9) of Section} (14) and Section (15) of the WaK Act,^{1995 (as amendedin 2013),} the'Governor of Telangana State^{hereby appoint Sri M.A.K.Muklrced} Advocate of High Court and Member of^{Bar Councilas memberof} Telangana State Waq Board^{from the Bar Council under Category 14} (1) (b) (iii) of the WaK Act, 1995, as amended^{in 2013.":}

¶107

The Chief Executive Officer,^{Telangana StateWaqfBoardshall} take immediate^{necessaryactionin the matter accordingly.}

¶108

(BY ORDER AND IN THE NAME OF^{THE GOVERNOROF TEI.ANGANA)}

¶109

SYED OMER JALEEL SECRETARY^{TO GOVERNMENT}

¶110

(B) The Memo dated 07.1O .2023 issued bv the 2nd

¶111

resDo dent is ext^{ractedhereunder:-}

¶112

"GOVERNMENT^{OF TELANGANA} MINORmES WELFARE^{(ESTT-rr)DEPARTMENT}

¶113

Memo No,2872lEstt.U/ 2023 Dated:07.10.2023.

¶114

Sub: Minorities Welfare^Department -^{Reconstitution of} Telangana State Waqf^{Board under WaqfAct,1995} - Inclusion of Sri M.A.K.^{Mukheed, Advocate,HighCourt of} Telangana as member^{of Telangana State WaqfBoard as} per 14 (lxb)(iii) of Waqf Act,¹⁹⁹⁵ -^Reg.

¶115

Ref: 1. G.O.Ms.No.25,^{Min.Wel(Estt.Ii)Dept., Dt.30.04'2022'}

¶116

Government have^{constitutedtheTelangana StateWaqf Board} vide G.O. Reference cited.

¶117

.. .'j -],r,=:E;:!:,5:ia€i-

¶118

¶119

As per the Waof Act 1995, as amended irr 2013, section 14 (1) (b) (iii) provides for election of one and not n ( € than two Muslim members from the Bar Council Category i" if,.'ru"qi'a"ard. It was informed that there are only two f\au;lim membi,r;'Jitne sar Councit and during election becauseof a Tie, n. n4.ttli, al'resotveO by way of Toss and Sri Zakeer Hussain Javeei was aEU,e f .f.".0.

¶120

^^{_- 9grurnTent being the competent authc .ity to decidethe} composition.of the board, it is decided to .onoiuil the uoara with erevenmembers dury incruding sri M.A.K. Nurneer niuo."t", Member of Bar Council as member of Telangana State wiil eolrd from the sar Councit under Category 14(1) (bxiii).^{---rv -qlr'|vvurr}

¶121

.^{The Chief Executive Officer,} Telangana St;rl : Waqf board shall take immediate necessary.aion in ttre m5[., *., iii,iv.

¶122

SYED OI\ ER ]ALEEL SECRETAR' TO GOVERNMENT

¶123

c The ou ter tt a h of lr soondent No.1 nd ul 1 r !^as und er:-

¶124

"12. That, issuing of the impugned G.O., is withjn the powers of the Waqf Board as contemplated under Section 14 of I e Waqf Act, 1995, as such there is no violation of any provisions of J e Waqf Act, 1995 and there are not at all any violation of Article 12, .r. ,¹⁶ and 21 oF the Constitution of India, since there is no legal rigl- t ; which has been accrued to the petitioner has been taken away. The G.O.Ms.No.24 dated 13.04.2022 does not bar the 2nd ie; rondent for the reconstitution of the Waqf Board by adding Eleventlr 111)^member, the defeat of the 1$ respondent does not disqualifu this r :spondent for the post of Member of the Waqf Board.

¶125

¶126

That, section 14(lxbxiii)^{of the Waqf Act, 1995 under this} category there shall be^{MuslimMemberof the Bar Councilof the State} one and not more than^{twomembers, as the State Government may} think fit. In this matter^{thereis Two (2) Bar Council Members, one is} 1$ respondent and another^{is Mr. M. Zakeer Hussain Javid, as such} there is no violation of^{the Section 14 of the Waqf Act. 1995 or any} rights of the^petitioner has been^{effected becausehe is not the} Member of Bar Council^{and not the Member of the Electoral Collegeof} any category as mentioned^{in section14 of the Waqf Act, 1995'}

¶127

That, the^{petitioner failed to disclose thecause of action and} the locus sbndito file this writ^{petitionand the writ petition is a proxy} litigation which has filed^on behalf^{of the vested interested persons'as} such the writ^petition is^{liable to be dismissedwith exemplary cost"'}

¶128

(D) Th counter affidavit led o beha lf of soond ent 2a n !ar r Nos 1 nd 14 ad

¶129

u nder:*7. In reply to Para No's.4 & 5 of the Writ Petitioner's Affidavit' it is true that Government vide^{G.o'Ms No.25,dated: 30'04'2022'} appointment of Sri Zakir^{HussainJaveedwas notified from Bar Council} as the Member of Waqf^{Board. It is submittedthat as per Waqf Act} 1995 Sec. 14 it is construed^{that the elected members shall not exceed} more than 8 members^{andnominated members shall not exceed more} than 5 members subject to^{availability of eligible candidateswith the} total numbers of 13^{Members in a Board, out of which1 Membershall} be selected and appointed^{as Chairmanof TelanganaState Waqf}

¶130

:.^{-i_ i:|:-,!e.--:{1:rl}

¶131

¶132

Board. Hyderabad and as per Waqf Act, 1995 1t e number of elected members of the board shall, at all times, be mo.t than the nominated members of the Board except as provided un( er Sub_section (3). Accordingly Government have accommodated Orrt more member from the Bar Council of Telangana and the said pet.s:n was declared as "Elected" under 14 (1) (b) (iii) of the Act. It s arso pertinent to mention here that in a previous precedent case (;( vernment have arso re-constituted the Telangana Shte Waqf Board rr th (11) Members in G.O.Ms.NO.No.9. Minorities Welfare (Estt-l) Department dt 23.02.2017.

¶133

I respectfully submit that the Gover r rent after careful examination of the mafter and in view of the o_r ers of this Hon,ble Court, re-constituted the board with eleventh mer tber duly including the 1st Respondent as member of Waqf Board fr m the Bar Council under Caregory l4(lxbxiii) of Waqf Act, 1995, ir: amended in 2013 and directed the Chief Executive Officer, Wirr f Board to take immediate necessary action in the matter in acco r ance with G.O. Ms. No.10 dated 05.03.2024',. This respondent have ,u!ly comptied the orders of the Hon,ble Court dated 09_02_2024 in I A.No.l of 2024 in W.P.No.3478 of 2024.

¶134

I respectfuly submit that the petitioner err: r to note that the Government is the competent authority to decide t te composition of the Board to include one mcre Member from the ]ar Council under Category 14(tXbxiii)of theWaqf Act, 1995.,,

¶135

¶136

(E) Theco nter affid vlt led onbe alf of res ndent N tn r a d r

¶137

"19. That, the person interested does not have any locus standi to question the impugned notification, there is no cause of action to the petitioner to file this writ petition, since he is not at ail the member of any electoral college defined in sectjon 14(1XbXD(iixiii)(iv) of the Wakf Act, 1995 and also not qualified to the category of section 1a(l)(c)(d)(e) of rhe Wald Act, 199s.

¶138

That, the petitioner failed to make out the contents in the writ petition that, there is any erement of writ of quo warranto or writ of prohibition.

¶139

21, That, the petitioner also failed to establish the contents of the writ petition that the Board Members are having any constitutional powers, statutory powers and responsibilities to maintain the writ of euo Warranto.

¶140

That, the petitioner failed to mention in the affidavit that, which provisions of.the wakf Act, lggs and rures made thereunder has been violated by the 2nd respondent, however during the course of hearing the petitioner relied on the Telangana State Wakf Rules, 2022 most particularly Rule 7 to 42 of the Telangana State Wakf Rules, 2022, in case the petitioner is relying in violations of any rule the writ petition is not maintainable. The p€titioner have to approach the Hon,ble Wakf Tribunal under Rule 7(A) of the Telangana State Wakf Rules, 2022. In case the arguments of the petitioner accepted that there as violations

¶141

¶142

of Telangana State lVakf^{Rules,2022,there is an el ective alternative} remedy, as such the w:'it^{petition is ntrt maintainab e as there is an} effective alternative^remedy.

¶143

That the Wal:f P.ules No. 7 to^{42 of the TelcrlanaState WaK} Rules, 2022 is not applicable to^{the presentc;tl e, since the2d} respondent exercised the^{power tinder section 14 >f the WaK Act,} 1995 to compiete the reconstitution of^{the WaKBo: rd appointed the} 19t respondent as a Mernber cf^{the WaK Board t'l the erirent of 11} rnembers by exercising^{l-he powers conte,nplated ur 1er section14(3)} of the Wakf Act,^1995.

¶144

That, to sum up the matter^{petitioner doesrrl t have any locus} iandi and failed to^prove the^{issue cf "Locus Stantli ' as mentioned in} pa:-a supra anC the elements of the S.trit of Quo^{V/ rrrantoci' Writ of} Prohibitirrn is lacking. The :ngredients^{of the caul;t of action is not} mentioned and also failed to^p!'ove that^{the 2nd r€s )ondentdoes not} have arry powers to appoint the 1r^{respondent,ls such the writ} petition rs iiabie to be dismissed."

¶145

(F) The O rder dated 12.O3. 2024_ _-passed-jtr W.P.No.3478 of 2O24. in oarticular at^{oara 6it is observed}

¶146

as under:

¶147

Taking into ccnslderation the⁽ lntents of^the G.o.Ms.No.10 dated 05.03.2024,^{passed irfavour"of the} petitiorler by the respondenl No.1 and dull considering^the iact that the respondent tlc.1 directed^{the res )ondentl'1o.2to}

¶148

¶149

take immediate necessary action in the matter accordingly, this Court opines that the grievance of the petifioner as DUt F:;'--:-:-------forth in the present Writ petition No.347g of 2024 has been addressed by the respondents.,,

¶150

¶151

(G) Th der d ted I o24 a

¶152

W.P.No.2 913a of 2023 is ra hereunder:

¶153

ORDER:

¶154

"When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the causeln the writ petition does not survive for adjudication.

¶155

Recording the said submission, this Writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs.

¶156

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.,,

¶157

DI uss N D c

¶158

D ISCUsslo N:

¶159

5 Th lea r ed tor e a u riD .Lak mt Na f simh , ADDE annq on beha lf of the Detitroner mainlv outs fo th oll n b t tion case that:

¶160

(i) Petitioner is a Muslim and a practicing Advocate and being interested in the well being and good administration of the Waqf Board is a person interested in the Waqf as designed under

¶161

¶162

Section 3 (k) of the WaqF Act, 1995 and hence pet lioner has locus to file the present writ petition.

¶163

(ii) The appointment of the l't respondent i r the very same category to which one Mr. Zakir Hussain Javid had t een elected and Respondent No.1 defeated under Section 14 (1) (lt ( iii) is contrary to Law since there is no power vested with the Government to nominate the l't respondent under the very same:;r ction.

¶164

(iii) The order impugned in the present rit petition i.e,, ^ G.O.Ms.No.10, Minorities Welfare (Estt-11) De1 artment d ated 05.03.2024 issued by the 2nd respondent app )inting the 1"t respondent is wholly without power of jurisdictiorr a nd violative of Articles 12, t4, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of In I a.

¶165

(iv) The Government has no power to r( view its earlier decision made vide G.O.Ms,No.25 dated 30.O4.2022

¶166

(v) Section 14(1) (b) (iii) recognizes or y one tyPe of appointment i.e, by election, 2nd respondent has r of no power or Authority to issue any order under the elected cai rgory of Section 14 (1) (b) (iii) making any appointments.

¶167

(vi) As per Telangana Waqf Rules 2022 d I ed 20.O7.2022, any person from the elected category can only be ;r rpointed.

¶168

(

¶169

¶170

(vii) Government has got power to appoint any member to the Waqf Board only when a vacaftclf--oc€tni==tls-to deeth; resignation etc., and not otherwise in the present case there is no such occasion and hence the impugned order is bad in law.

¶171

(viii) Member Waqf Board is a statutory post and public post and the illegality in the appointment of Member of Waqf Board is amenable to judicial scrutiny.

¶172

(ix) Respondent No.l rvho had been defeated in the election in the vear 2022 cannot be appointed in the year 2024, Government had misused its power and therefore, the appointment of the 1't respondent is bad in law.

¶173

B sed on e re s ssr e a rned u a rtn nb alf he te th et ner eret se led h fa n th res nt wri ron ndi u of on ubm ron the r lianc had en ed EJ men

¶174

heA xC enli ted low:

¶175

(1) !!ytam^{Qadirv. Special Tribunal, reportedin (2002)1} SCC 33, para 38.

¶176

(2) N Kannadasan v. Ajo Khose and others (2009) 7 SCC 1 Paras 109, 723,I25, L29, L3t to 136, tOZ, tOZ.

¶177

¶178

(3) Central Electricity Supply Utility of Odis:i v. Dhobei sahoo and others (2014) 1 SCC 161^pel)s'. 17,19,20, 2L, 22,23, 47, 5t.

¶179

(4) Anirudh Kumar v. Municipal Corporation rf Delhi and others: (2015) 7 SCC 799: paras 26, 2) , 40.

¶180

(5) Gambhirdan K Gandhvi v. State of Gtr- rrat: (2022) 5 SCC 179 paras: 10.3, 15, 16 to [a,49, !1.

¶181

(6) Professor Syed Haider l-lassan Kazimi arrr ors v. State of Vy'est Bengal: 2024 SCC Online Cal ))3'.^paras 2,9, 10, 11, t4,15,16, 1.9,21 , ?.2,23,29, :it to 38,41,42, 52, 53 to 55,71,72.

¶182

The learned Senior desiqnate counsel Sri J iandra Mohan Rao a DDearano on behalf of the 1't res^nonde C t mainlv nuts forth the followi a submissro ns:-

¶183

(i) The petitioner f3iled to explarn the caus I of action and petitionert locus standi in filing the present writ per i ion.

¶184

(ii) The writ petition is a proxy litigation f I :d on behelf of vested interested persons anci hence needs to be di; nissed.

¶185

(iii) The present writ petition seekin I issuance of

¶186

Quo-warranto^{is not rnaintainablefor two reasons:}

¶187

(1) The appointment of Board Member ; not the office of profit.

¶188

(2) Board t4ember dces not have a r r official public duties and si,atutory responsibiliiirl

¶189

¶190

(iv) State Government is^{having ample powersto} constitute/reconstitute^{the Waqf Boardunder Section 13 and 14 of} the Waqf Act^{1995, and hence the issuanceof the impugned} G.O.Ms.No.10^{dated05.03'2024 issued by the 2nd respondentis} within the^{powers of the Waqf Board as contemplated under Section} 14 of the Waqf^{Act, 1995 as such there is no violationof any} provisions of the Waqf^{Act 1995 nor violation of ArticlesL2' 14' t6} "^{and 21 of the Constitutionof India as alleged by the petitionerand}

¶191

h.gnce^{the present writ petition needsto be dismissed in limini'} . (v) No legal rights^{had been accrued to the petitioner which} had been taken^{awayby the respondents hence no Writ of Quo} warranto lies and^{thereforethe presentwrit petitionis liable to be} dismissed since^{thereis no infringementof petitioner's rights by the} respondents^herein.

¶192

(vi) The defeat of the^{1't respondent does not disqualify the} 1tt respondent^{for the post of Memberof the Waqf Board'}

¶193

(vii) The G.O.Ms.No.24^{dated 13'04'2022does not bar the} 2nd respondent^{for the reconstitution of the Waqf Boardby adding} Eleventh⁽ 11th^Member).

¶194

(viii) There is no violation of Section 14 rf the Waqf A.ct, 1995 as alleged by the petitioner.

¶195

(ix) Petitioner has no locus since petit i )ner is not the member of Bar Council nor the member of the E r ctoral College of any category as mentioned in Section 14 of the W I 1f Act, 1995.

¶196

(x) The policy decision of the State cove.r ment cannot be interfered on the flirnsy and false grounds raised ry the petitioner when the petitioner is not even an aggrieved persc L

¶197

(xi) The Judgments relied upon by the earned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner are relatec to the otiice of profit and hence the said case Lams are not appli(., ble to the facts of the present case.

¶198

Ba sed on e re id ub tsst ns the ..1 earned Senior de u rl o be alf fth st resDond t u di al s t writ tit I rn and olaced reli o t n u m nts of r I Apex Co ts tn u l"t re on en 'sc e;e.

¶199

2006 (11) SCC pageT3t (paras 50, 51 ar: j2

¶200

AiR 1965 SCC page 491

¶201

AJR 1996 (AP) 10 -

¶202

(2021) 14 SCC 211

¶203

¶204

ear^e A dit onal vocate General n tYlohd 7 nd r r a nl^v uts fo^{rththe foilow} tno ubm is^slons Petitioner^{is not an interested person oraggrieved} (i)

¶205

person. (ii) Government^{has the power or authority to nominate} one^{and not more than two members from the category of Muslim} members^{of the Bar Council of the concernedState or Union} Jerritory.

¶206

{i'ri)^{lQrcvemtnenthad accommodatedone more member} from^{the Bar councir of relanganaand the saidpersonwas declared} as^{..Erected,, under 14 (lxb)(iii)of the Act and hence there is no} illegaffi^{in the order impugned in the presentwrit petition'} (iv) - Gqvernment^{is the competentauthority to decide the} composition^{of the Board to include one more memberfrom the Bar} Council^{under Categorv 1q (r)(b)(ili) of the WaqfAct' 1995'} (v) Petitioner^{has no locus and the writ petitionis devoidof}

¶207

merits.

¶208

ri+...ail**€i*.iii5;{i.:

¶209

¶210

a lsl on the r ed d i t the wrat petition di

¶211

8 T I u ,t'tn on beh lf of t n t a Ati I rmil matn v D forth e followi n U b ron

¶212

(i) Petitioner has no locus to file the pr€: ent writ petition. (ii) The present writ of euo_warranto s not maintainable stnce the appointment of Board Member is not t re office of profit, and the Board Member does not have any offici; ,l public duties and statutory responsibilities.

¶213

(iii) There is no violation of any fu r iamentat rights, statutory rights and any other legal rights of the p< trtioner (iv) The Board is a Body Corporate t- I ving perpetual succession under Section 13 (3) of rhe Waqf Act, 1))5. (v) As per the Judgment of the Division Ber ch of this Court reported in 1996 (1) ALT 236 in the matter of yr,;uf eureshi Vs. Moulana Mohd. lamaluddin Deccani, it is clear that i poiicy decision taken by the Government cannot be challenged unr r r Article 226 of

¶214

¶215

theConstitutionoflndiaonthisgroundalcnethepresentwrit petition is liable to^{be dismissed'}

¶216

(vi) Petitioner^{during the course of argumentsthroughhis} counsel complained^{violation of TelanganaState Waqf Rules 2022'} more^{particularly Rule 7 to 42 of the TelanganaState Waqf Rules} 2022andthereforetheremedyavailabletothepetitioneristo approach the^{Waqf Tribunal under Rule 7(A) of the Telangana State} Waqf Rules^2022.

¶217

B res s b assr ns he le ne tf h rd s n t m e wn eti n

¶218

co CLUSI^ON:

¶219

9 1 1 95 t e ra d re nd

¶220

"14. ComPosition^{of Board.-}

¶221

G)^{TheBoardfor a Stateand the National Capital Territory of Delhi} shall consist^of-

¶222

(a) a ChairPerson;

¶223

(b) one and not^{more than two members'as theState} Government^{may think fit, to be elected from each of the} electoral colleges^{consisting of} -

¶224

¶225

(i) Muslim Members of parliament frc n the State or, as the case may be, the National Capital Ter.ritnr 1of^Delhi; (ii) Muslim Members cf the State Legis ature;

¶226

(iii) Muslim members of the Bar Courc I of the ccncerned State or Union tenitory: provided that iicase there is no Muslim member of the Bar Council of a Itate or a r.,nion territory the State Government or tle Union terr;i:ory administration, as the case may be, may nc ninate eny serlor l,luslim advocate from that State cr the Uniolr lerritory, aod

¶227

(iv) n:utawallis of the auqaf having a r .:nnUal !ncO,-''le ol' rupees one lakh and above.

¶228

Exoianation I.-For the removal of dorrl ts, it is hereby declareC that the nlembcrs frorn categories r rentionsd in sub_ clauscs (i) to (iv), shall be elected from tl-€ electoret coilege constituted for each ctegory.

¶229

Exolan tion u.-For the removal of dou )ts it is hereby declared that in case a Muslim member ceasr)r to be a Mernber of Parliament from the State or National C. tital Te.r,tory oF Delhj as referred to in sub-cleuse (i) of clause (b) c:. ceases to be a Member of the State Legislative Assrrr rbly as required under sub-clause (ii) of clause (b), such r e..nber shall be deerncd to ha'.,e vacated the office of the me r ber of the tioard for the State or Nationel Capita! Territory of t:lh!. as the case may be, from the date from whlch such memtx r ceased to be a Member of Parliament from the State Nation: I Capital Terrrtory of Deihi, or a Member cf the State Legislative , ssembly, as the case may be;

¶230

¶231

¶232

(c) one person^{from amongst Muslims'who hasprofessional} experienceⁱⁿ lswn^{planningor businessmanagemen!social} work, finance^{or revenueT agricultureand teveloptnent'} activities,^{to be nominated by the State Government;} G+one^{perssh each from amongstMuslims'to be nominated} by the State^{Governmentfromrecognisedschotarsin} Sunni Islamic^TheologY;

¶233

G)^{one person fromamongst Muslims'to be nominatedby the} State Government^{fromamongstthe officers of the.State} Government^{not below the rank of lointSecretaryto the State} Govemmentl

¶234

(1A) No Minister^{of the Central Governmentor' as thecase may} membei of^{theBoard:Providedthat in case of a Unionterritory'} the Board^{shall consistof not less than five and not more than} seven members^{to be appointed by the CentralGovernment} fromcategoriesspecifiedundersub-clauses(i)to(iv)ofclause (b) or clauses{fl-E-(b)^{in sub-section(1):Providedfurther} Jffie Board shall^{be women:} Providedalsothatineverycasewherethesystemofmutawalli exists, there^{shallbe one mutawallias the memberof the} Board.

¶235

(2) Election of^{the membersspecified in clause (b) of sub-} section^{(1) shall be held in accordance with the system of} proportional representation^{by means of a single transferable} ' vote, in such manner as may be prescribed:

¶236

.:;*.4i,,i11;;i..-

¶237

¶238

Provided that where the number of Muslim Members of Parliament. the State Legislature or the ;tate Bar Council, as the case may be, is only one, such Mus im Member shall be declared to have been elected on the Bc ird: provided Further that where there are no Muslim Merr rers in any of the categories mentioned in sub_clauses (i) tc (iii) of clause (b) of sub-section (l) the ex_Muslim Members ot. )arliament, the State Legislature or ex_member of the State Bar Council, u, ,nu .ur. may be, shall constitute the electoral collery, .

¶239

(3) Nohvithstanding anything contained ir this section, where the State Government is satisfied, for reas: rs to be recorded in writing, that it is not reasonably practic. t le to constitute an electoral college for any of the categorie; mentioned in sub_ clauses (i) to (iii) of clause (b) of sub_str tion (1). the State Government may nominate such persons as he memberc of the Board as it deems fit.

¶240

(1) The number of elected mernbers of th: Board shafl, at all times, be more than the nominated merl Ers of the Board except as provided uncler sub_section (3).* ,, r * *

¶241

(6 ) In determining the number of Shia r rembers or Sunni members of the Board, the State Governmem shall have regard to the number and value of Shia auqaf and iunni auqaf to be adm;nistered by the Board and appointmerrl of the members shalr be made, so far as may be, in acc,r dance with such determination.fxx fQ)^Whenever the Board is

¶242

members or the Board,,..,",l:::tii*',jiljlll' rl;,T""

¶243

¶244

purpose shall elect cne from amongst themselves as the Chairperson of the Board. (!) The members of tfe Soardthall be appointed by the State Government by notification in the Official Gazette."

¶245

A bare perusal of the first proviso (referred to and extracted above) indicates the fact that there are twin conditions, to be eligible to be a Member of the Board, namely,

¶246

(1) The candidate must be from the Muslim Community and

¶247

(2) The candidate must hold a position either as a Member of Parliament, or a member of the State Legislative Assembly. or a member of the Bar Council.

¶248

section 14 of rhe1^qqs A.f which dea with

¶249

comoosition of Board reads as under:

¶250

(1) The Board for a State and the Nationat Capital Territory of Delhi shall consist of

¶251

(a) a Chair person,

¶252

(b) one and not more than two members, as the State Government may think fit, to be elected from each of the etectoral colleges consisting

¶253

oJ,

¶254

¶255

(i) Muslim Members of Parliamerr t from the State or person as the case may be, the National

¶256

Capital Territory of Dclhi,

¶257

(ii) Muslim Members of the State Lerr islatu re, (iii) Muslim Members of the Bar Cc uncil of the concerned State or Union Territory.

¶258

A bare perusal of the interim orders of this Court dated 09.02.2024 passed in W.P.No.347.8 of 2O24, indic.i tes that this Court vide the said order directed the first responder I to issue the Government Order as contemplated under Section 14 .1)^{(b) (iii) of} the Waqf Act, 1995 for the constitution of the Telang;r ra State Waqf Bcard in pursuance to the Memo No.2872lEstt-:. /2023^Cated 07.70.2023.

¶259

A bare perusal of the t4emo dated 07.10.20:t, (referred to and extracted above) indicates that Government la d constituted the Telangana State Waqf Board vide G.O.Ms.No, 25 Minorities Welfare (Estt.II) Department dated 30.04.2O22. Du-i 1g Election in the year 2022 there were only trvo Muslrm memb: 's of the 8ar Council, and there was a tie and lrence the matter lt; s resclved by way of Toss and the 1't respondent lvas defeaterl and one Sri

¶260

)

¶261

¶262

Zakeer Hussain Javid was declared elected, and since Government is the competent Authority to declde the it was decided to constitute the Boaril urith eleven members duly including Sri M.A.K. Mukheed, Advocate, Member of Bar Council as Member of Telangana State Waqf Board from the Bar Council under category 14(1) (b) (iii) and accordingly the Chief Executive Officer, Telangana State Waqf Board was directed to take immediate necessary action in the matter and in consequence thereto the present impugned G.O.Ms.No.10 dated 05.03.2O24 had been lssued by the 2nd respondent. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition primarily contending that Government has no power to review its earlier decision made vide G.O.Ms.No.25 dated 30.04.2O22 along with few other pleas.

¶263

In so far as the locus of the petitioner is concerned though a specific plea is taken by the respondents that petitioner has no locus since petitioner is not an aggrieved or interested person since the petitioner is not the Member of Bar Council and not the member of the Electoral College of any category-.Aj=m,entioned in Section 14 of the Waqf Act, 1995, but since the pg!I9!gr specifically contends that petitioner is a person interested under Section 3(k) of the

¶264

¶265

Waqf Act, 1995 this Court opines that petitioner has locus to file the present writ petition.

¶266

Sectio n 3(k) of Waof Act. 1995 is extracl :a d hereunder:

¶267

"Under Section 3(k) "person interested in a vaqf,, means any person who is entitled to receive any pecuniary or c .her benefits from the waqf and includes-

¶268

(i) any person who has a right to offer prayer c. to perform any religious rite in a mosque. idgah, imambara, rargah, khanqah, peerkhana and karbala, maqbara, graveyard or il y other religious instituticn connected with the waqf or to participat(, n any religious or charitable institution under the rtaqf;

¶269

(ii) the waqif and any descendant of the waqif and tl" : mutawalli;,,

¶270

Takino into consideration Section 3(k)([ of the V,laqf Act, 1995 (referred to and extracted above)^,;l ris Court is of the firm ooinlon that Detiti nertsao rson i rteres d and oner s locu uesti cons g n of the Waof Board,

¶271

In so far as the merits of the present case are cOncerneC it iS the specific case of the petitioner that as per Telan,; rna yy'aqf Rules 2022 dated 20.07.2022 only one person from the : ected category can only be appointed but however in the preserl case if in the year 2022, one Sri Zakeer Hussain lavid was de< I tred elected in

¶272

¶273

the year 2025^{vide the impugnedG.O.Ms.No.1Odated 05'03'2024} issued by the^{2nd respondent,} the^{lst respondentis appointedas} Member of Telangana^{Waqf Board underplected categoly,and the} same is^{permissible underlaw.}

¶274

L4. This rto at 1 f e Wa f 199 nea e rs s e Sta v ment tn fat u b le m c of the electoral^{colleoes consistino of;}

¶275

(i) Muslim Members of Parliament^{fpEr the} -SJale^{or as the} case may be^{(theNational CapitalTerritory of Delhi),}

¶276

(il) Muslim Members of the State^Legislature,

¶277

Muslim Members of the Bar^{Council of the concerned} ( iii)

¶278

State or Union^TerritorY.

¶279

-:#

¶280

In the^{present case one Muslim Memberhad been declared} elected vide^{G.O.Ms.No.25dated30.04'2022under Section} 14(1)(b)(iii) under^{Electedcategoryand the Government vide the} impugned G.O.Ms.No.10^{dated 05.O8I(I24'dulyconsid€ring the} interim orders^{of this Courtdated 09.O2'2024in I'A'No'L of 2024 in} W.P.No.3478 of^{2024 appointed the 1s respondent, i'e', Sri M'A'K'}

¶281

.-\

¶282

¶283

Mukheed, Advocate and Member Terangana Sta:r Bar councir as Second Member of the Bar Council of Telangana leclaring the 1rr respondent as elected as Member of the Telanc:na State Waqf Board under Section 14 (1Xb)(ii,) as per polic,r decision of the State Government. This Court opines that tir I same is not permissible as per Section 14(1Xb) of the Waqf Act 1995.

¶284

This Court opines that as per Section L4(1) ib)(iii) one and not more than two members as the State Governrr t nt may think fit could be elected from the Muslim Members oi. the E,i r Council of the concerned State or Union Territory. In the present :ase aCmittedly as borne on record there had been no election (( nducted in the year 2025 and this Court can oniy dra\ry an inte -ence that the appointment of the 1't respondent by the 2nd res )ondent is not under elected category but on nomination b3sis.

¶285

This Court also takes note of the fact t lat Waqf Act 1995 does not provide for appointrnent of ,vr, rmber of Bar Counci! of Telangana under catego rV la (.1) (tr of the Waqf Act, 1995, on nomination basis and Act on ly stipulates election from each of thc electoral colleges cor sisting of (i)

¶286

¶287

Muslim Members of parriament from the state or as-the case. l may be (The Nationa! Capita! Territory of Dethi), (ii) Muslim members of the State Legislature, (iii) Mustim members of the Bar Council of the concerned State or Union territory-

¶288

In so far as the ptea of the respondents, that the present writ petition seeking ..Writ of euo_warranto,, is not maintainable on the ground that the appointment of Board Member is not the Office of profit, and the Board Member does not have any official pubilc duties and statutory responsibalitaes, this Court opines that the nature of functions exercised by the Waqf Board and ats members is .19t "ntv^{a publicduty but touches the rights} oIJfp_ggp!,",I general and therefore thtr*g!4 opines that a member of_the_-- _ Waqf Board holds a public office and as such the order impugned is amenable to Judicial Scrutiny.

¶289

This Court opines that the plea in the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.2 at para ,2, (referred to and extracted above) that Government had accommodated one more member from the Bar Council of Tetangana and the

¶290

¶291

said person i,e., the 1"t respondent^was declared as "Elected" under Section 14(lXb)(iii)^{of the \At,} rqf Act, 1995 is not tenabte and is rejected since^th e impugned G.O.Ms.No.1O dated O5.O3.2024^{issuedby the :l} 'd respondent appointing the l"t respondent as the^membet of Telangana State Waqf Board from the Bar Council^{unde t} category 14 (lxb)(iii) of the Waqf Act, 1995, as amendc d in 2O13 is contrary to the statute and the relevant^provisi rns of Law of the Waqf Act, 1995 and the Rules^{made thereur} d er.

¶292

This Court also takes note of the^{speci 'i} : plea of the petationer that as per Telangana Waqf Rule^: 2022 dated 2O,O7.2fJ22 only one person from the^electerl category can only be appointed and in the^{present case in I} he year 2022 one person by name Sri M.Zakeer^Hussain-Ia ,id had been appointed under the elected category^an(l the present impugned G.O.Ms.No.1O ciated O5.03.2O24^isst ed by the 2nd respondent in favour of the l't respondent^rrr minating the 1't respondent to the Telangana State^{WaqfB )} rrd under the elected category is in contravention of the^sit d waqf Rules dated 2O.O7.2022,

¶293

¶294

In so far as retiance placed on the Judgment of the Apex Court reported in 2OO6 (11) SCC l3t by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 1"t respondent on the point that this Court cannot sit in Judgment over the wisdom of the Government in the choice of the person to be appointed so long as the person chosen possesses prescribed qualification and is otherwise eligible for appointment this Court opines that the said Judgment is not applicable to the facts of the present case, since in the present case the appointment of the l.t respondent vide the impugned G.O., of the 2"d respondent dated O5.O3.2024 as contrary to the statutory provisions of the Waqf Act 1995 and the Rules made thereunder.

¶295

It is ettled lawwh en a statute describes or reou res a thinq be done in a Darticu lar manner it should be donein that mann er or notat a il.

¶296

A) (M.Shankara Reddy Vs...Amara Ramakoteswara Rao reported in (2017) SCC Online Hyd a26).

¶297

¶298

B) The D rvrston Bench of ADex ourt in its iudqment dated o4.to.2,J2l an SuDertec hL .. Vs. ! merald Court Owner Resident Welfare Associati on and I )rs., reoorted in2 21 SCC Online SC 422, referring :o Taylor Vs. Taylor, 1875 (1) Ch D42q Nazir Ahrr ed Vs. King Emperor reported in (1936) L.R.63 Inr Ap372 and Parbhani Transport Co-operative Societ) Ltd., Vs. The Regional Transpoft Authority, Aurang,r rad & Ors., reported in AIR 1960 SC gol at para 1l observed as under :

¶299

"It is that where a power is given to dc r certain thing in a certain way, the thing must be done in th r way or not at all and that other methods of performance r re necessarily forbidden. Hence when a statute requircs a par icuiar thing to be done in a particular manner, it must b: done in that manner cr not at all and other methods of pe .formance are necessarily forbidden, This Court too, as adcp:r d this maxim. This rule orovides that an exrrress lv laid rI rwn mode of doin somethi nq necess lv imolies a rl ohi_bj!.!qn on doins it in any other u.rav."

¶300

¶301

This Couft opines that the impugned G.O.No.1O^dated O5..O3.2O24; issued by the 2"d resiondent appointing^thG 1* respondent as Member Telangana State waqf Board^is contrary to the legislature's intent defeating the^apparent intent of the Legislature by resorting to a^{procedure not} prescribed by the relevant statute and the Rules made thereunder.

¶302

Thas Court opines that the procedure laid down^under , {] the statute as per Section 14 (1) (b) (iai) Waqf Act^{1995 has} to be necessarily followed since an expressly laid^down mode of doing something necessarily implies a^prohibition on doing it in any other way.

¶303

-'---:-=-::-

¶304

The Apex Court in its recent Judgment reported^{in 2O25} Live Law (SC) 454 dated 22.04.2O25 in 'MD.FIROZ^AHMAD KHALID VS. THE STATE OF ]VIANIPUR ANO OTHERS",^At PATA 17 observed as under:

¶305

'17. At this^juncture, we take note of Lord^{Denning'swords of} -3,-wisdom in Seaford Court Estates Ld. v. Asher [(1949) 2^K.B.481]

¶306

"...when a defect appears a^judge cannot simply^{fold his hands} and blame the drafuman. He must set to work^{on the constructive}

¶307

¶308

task of Civil Appeat No(s). 3797 e.3l9} of 2OZ5 .t. of 25 finding the intention of Parliament, and he must do this r rt only from the Ianguage oF the statute, but also from a consid€r rtion of the social conditions which gave rise to it, and of the mi:r rief which it was passed to remedy, and then he must supplement J e written word sc as to give "force and life., to the intention of the k < islature. That was clearly laid dorvn by the resolution of the judges in I eydon's case, and it is the safest guide today. Good practical advice c r the subject was given about the sarne time by plcwden in his secorc volume Eyston v. Studd. Put into homely metaphor it is this: A judge hould ask himself the question: If the makers of the Act had them:,r lves conte across this ruck in the texture of it, how would they have ;l -aightened it out? He must then do as they would have done. A judge nust not alter the material of which it is woven, but he can and s I ru!d iron out the creases. "

¶309

This Court opines that the order arr pugned vide G.O.Ms.t{o.tO dated 05.O3.2024 passed by the znd respondent is contrary to the provisions ol Law and 2"d respondent has to necessarily examine its,J :cision rnade vide the impugned c.O.Ms.No.lO Minorities Wr: fare (Estt-II) Department dated 05.03.2O24 passed by the ;l d respondent and take appropriate action accordingly l :viewing its Cecision in accordance to the relevant provisio r t Gf the Vrraqf

¶310

(

¶311

¶312

Act 1995 and the releyant Rutes made thereunder and pass

¶313

appropria- te- gICerS. _

¶314

Takino into consideration:

¶315

(A) rne atOiesaft:ffiicumstances of the case,

¶316

(B) The averments made in the counter affidavit fited

¶317

on behalf of respondent Nos.l to 3,

¶318

(C) The submissions made by the learned cou nsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the lea rned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents,

¶319

(D) The interim Orders of this Court dated 09.O2.2O24 passed in I.A.No.1 ot 2O24 in W.p.No.3478 ol 2024 (referred to and extractad a_bo,!re)._

¶320

(E) T-he.=#f:4#F4"*==I203.2o24 .pasFed i&------..:W.P.No.3478 ol 2024 (referred to and extracted above), (F) . Tha^{jlrde.r-dat€d} tt.LO.ZO2g passed in W.P.No.29138 of 2Oj23 (referred to and extracted above),

¶321

(G) The Order dated L9.O3,ZO24 passed in W.P.No.29138 of 2O23 (referred to and extracted above),

¶322

¶323

(H) Section 14(1)(b)(iii) of the Waqf /,ct 1995, and Section 3(k) of the Waqf Act, 1995 (ret,rrred to and extracted a bove),

¶324

(I) The Judgments relied upon by the le rrned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner,

¶325

(J) The view and observations of the , \pex Court in the Judgments referred to and extracted abr ve and again enlisted below:

¶326

i) 2006 (11) SCC 731

¶327

ii) (2017) SCC Online Hyd 426)

¶328

iii) 2021 SCC Online SC 3422

¶329

iv) 2O25 Live Law (SC) 454 dated 22.04,ir-125,

¶330

Taking into consideration the fact that UI rqf Board has served important functions to discharge for effective implementation of the purposes of the statut€ and involves the rights of the public in general and further n view of the fact that thc entire administration and finance s of the Waqf properties in the state are under the direct : upervision of the Board of Waqf, the present Writ Petition i; disposed off directing the 2nd respondent to re-examine its decision

¶331

¶332

appoanting the 1"t respondent as Member of Telangana State Waqf Board vide G.O.Ms.No.10, Minorities Welfare (Estt-U) dated O5.O3,2O24 and take appropriate action as per the relevant provisions of the Waqf Act, 1995 and the Rules made thereunder, within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order duly taking into consideration the observations of the Apex Court in the Judgments referred to and extracted above, and also the observations in the present Judgment in the interest of justice and initiate appropriate action accordingly. However there shall be no order as to costs.

¶333

Miscellaneous petitions, lf any pending, in this writ petition shall

¶334

stand closed. II .M. OSMAN ALI BAIG ISTANT^REGISTRA

¶335

¶336

//TRUE^COPY//

¶337

SECTION^OFFICER One fair coPY^{to the HON'BLE MRSJUSTICESU} PALLI NANDA (For His LordshiP's^{Kind Perus al)}

¶338

to ',. ,n" secretary to Government of Telangana' secretary to Government of ' i;ir;s";;;, l,iinotiti.silJrare o".enf 1 iovern ment of^{reI ansa n a'}

¶339

' , ?f; :tH?L*3l:f:^{Hi":?:+::ilJffi} :siiq^{waqfBoa rd H a1 House} g'aziai lvlanzil, Nampally, Hyderabad^500001'

¶340

3 11 L,R.^CoPies.

¶341

The Under^{Secretary, Unionof lndia' Ministry of Law' Justice andCompany} Affairs, New^Delhi.

¶342

5 The Secretary,^{Telangana AdvocatesAssociation Library'HighCourt} Buildings,^HYderabad'

¶343

Buildings,^HYderabad'

¶344

6 Two Cc's^{to novoL"nfEGENERAL'High Courtfor the State of Telanganaat} Hyderabad^(OUT)

¶345

z ol,"""cc t"^{dn x ursHrul NARASIMHA,Advocate toqqgl .^.} 8 one cc^{to sRl xniiiA rinvilloEB} -BE-PDL^{Advocate IoPUcl} g one CC to SRI H'flri'irinniir-rt'r^{nu KAMIL'Advocate (oPUC)}

¶346