Back
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : V.V.S.RAO
Mohd.Riazuddin - Appellant
Versus
Government Of A.P. rep., by its Secretary, Revenue Department - Respondent
Decided On : 11-02-00
A.P. (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act, 1955 - A. P. State Wakf Board - Writ petition - Suit for specific performance - Land case – Petition and the regular first appeal are clubbed together as they relate to the land in guntas (hereafter called the inam land ) - This common order shall dispose of the writ petition as well as appeal - Petition is filed challenging the appellate order of the District Collector, the second respondent herein, in Proceedings under the A. P. (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act, - is filed against the judgment and decree dated filed by the a. P. State Wakf Board (which is 4th respondent in the writ petition) on the file of the Court of the subordinate Judge - Said suit is for declaration and perpetual injunction in respect of the suit property admeasuring guntas comprised in against three defendants who are the petitioners - For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred by their status in the writ petition – Held, - While summarising the pleadings and contentions, court have framed two points for consideration in the first appeal before - On these two points have already recorded findings that as per the judgment in and other evidence before the trial Court or before the District collector, it is reasonable to infer that the land was not acquired for a graveyard and that except in an extent of - There were no graves of the general public - Attention of this Court to Ex. A, which, as noticed is a report of survey of wakf property - In column 5 of the said report, it is mentioned as graveyard Phulong takia (dilapidated) and in column 6 it is shown that the land in sy No - admeasuring acres is also covered by the survey - Immediately below that it is mentioned that the land in sy. No, in favour excluding the graveyard - Again in column 8, it is clearly shown that an extent of Ac. gts. is graveyard and there is a timber shop in Ac,gts. allegedly belonging to one - Column no. 19 refers to the proceedings of Assistant commissioner (Law), dated in file N0, which allegedly declares an extent of in as wakf - However, is not able to invite the Courts attention to any evidence to show that the wakf was notified in accordance with the provisions of Wakf Act, 1954. Further, nobody on behalf of the Wakf Board spoke about the proceedings allegedly issued by the Assistant Commissioner (Law ) - The inspector who conducted the survey has noted in his remarks in column No. 20 of that there is a graveyard in sy. Nos - Remarks are vague and do not support the case of the plaintiff/appellant in the face of the judgment of this Court in A. S. No. and LPA No. - In the suit, the plaintiff also prayed for a perpetual injunction, but no evidence was placed before the trial Court to show that they were in possession of the property and the defendants are in any way interfering with the alleged graveyard - There is no iota of evidence placed before the trial Court to show that there was a graveyard except the photographs - which show scattered, graves here and there - In view of this, I must hold that the plaintiff has failed to prove the case as pleaded and the lower Court has considered the pleadings, relevant evidence in a proper perspective and recorded findings on all the issues, which do not warrant any interference in appeal - IN the result, the writ petition is allowed without costs and the impugned order of the second respondent in proceedings No is quashed and a writ of certiorari shall issue as indicated is dismissed with costs throughout – Dismissed.
( 1 ) THE writ petition and the regular first appeal are clubbed together as they relate to the land in Sy. No. 225 admeasuring Ac. 1. 39 guntas (hereafter called the inam land ) of nizamabad, This common order shall dispose of the writ petition as well as appeal.
( 2 ) THE writ petition is filed challenging the appellate order of the District Collector, nizamabad, the second respondent herein, in Proceedings No. C/36/86 dated 18-9-1989 under the A. P. (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act, 1955 (hereafter called the inams Act ). A. S. No. 1149 of 1994 is filed against the judgment and decree dated 28-4-1994 in O. S. No. 145 of 1987 filed by the a. P. State Wakf Board (hereafter called the wakf Board , which is 4th respondent in the writ petition) on the file of the Court of the subordinate Judge, Nizamabad. The said suit is for declaration and perpetual injunction in respect of the suit property admeasuring Ac. 1. 39 guntas comprised in sy. No. 225 against three defendants who are the petitioners in W. P. No. 13983 of 1989. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred by their status in the writ petition.
( 3 ) THE litigation in respect of inam land has a long history. There are proceedings between Tanzeemi Committee (Madina masjid), Nizamabad and the petitioners or their predecessors-in-title, proceedings between the Wakf Board and the petitioners or their predecessors-in-title and proceedings between respondents 6 to 9 and the petitioners from 1963 onwards. There were also proceedings between the predecessors in title of the petitioners and the erstwhile Government of Hyderabad. Therefore, it is necessary to notice the facts as culled out from voluminous record -pleadings, documents marked in earlier suits and proceedings, orders by various authorities including this Court.
( 4 ) THE Nizam of Hyderabad granted a muntakhab (Decree) No. 223 in the name of one Jamal Shah, s/o. Suleman Shah in respect of Ac. 5. 33 gts. of Boregaon village. and Ac. 2. 33 gts. of Nizamabad village. This was in 1282f corresponding to 1872-1873 a. D. After the death of Jamal Shah in 1302f (1892-93 AD), a fresh grant by way of succession was granted to Suleman Shah, s/o Jamal Shah. The land in Nizamabad originally comprised in Sy. Nos. 134 and 135, which were re-numbered later: Sy. No. 134 was re-numbered as 101/1 and Sy. No. 135 as 101/2. Subsequently an extent of Ac. 0. 34 gts. was classified as graveyard leaving ac. 1. 39 gts. in re-numbered Sy. No. 225. The dispute in this case as mentioned in the beginning is only with regard to Sy. No. 225 admeasuring Ac. 1. 39 gts.
( 5 ) IN 1924, the then Collector proposed to acquire the land in Sy. Nos. 101/1 and 101/2 for the purpose of a graveyard. After conducting inspection, the Collector, nizamabad, considering the grievance of inamdar, issued proceedings on 25-1-1924 deciding to exclude the land from acquisition proceedings. After the death of suleman Shah, his son, Nooruddin approached the Collector claiming succession to inam. After thorough enquiry under Atiyat Enquiry Act, the Collector by order dated 9-2-1930 (8th Fervardi 1339f) granted succession in Case No. 18/1958. The Collector held that the inam is Madad-e-Mash (free grant ). Nooruddin enjoyed the property without any objections.
( 6 ) IN 1963, Nooruddin, father of the third petitioner leased out the land to one mumtaz Ali for construction of a firewood shop. The Tanzeemi Committee of Madina masjid questioned the permission granted by the Nizamabad Municipality for setting up firewood shop. By an order dated 25-5-1964, the Collector set aside the permission granted by the Municipality and directed the parties to approach the competent Civil Court. The matter was carried to the Government by way of revision. The Government, vide G. O. Ms. No. 254, dated 12-3-1965, while rejecting the revision petition of Nooruddin directed the parties to seek redressal in Civil Court or atiyat Court. The Wakf Board also a
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
