B. K. SOMASEKHARA, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner claiming to be the Secretary of the Managing Committee of Madina Masjid, situated on Station Road, Secunderabad has assailed the proceedings No. 133/hyd. III/j1/kulyath/86/dated 19-10-96 of the Chairman of respondent No. 1, as illegal and unconstitutional and further seeks a direction to respondent No. 1 to continue the Managing Committee of the petitioner in the management of the Madina Masjid (for short the Mosque ). Respondent No. 1 is the A. P. State Wakf Board and respondent No. 2 is described as the Managing Committee of the Mosque represented by its President, Janab Mohd. Nazeer. The reason behind such assailment can be found in the facts disclosed from the petition and the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No. 1. It appears that originally the Mosque was a small one and it was being looked after by its Muthawalli, late Md. Ibrahim. The petitioner claims that after the death of Md. Ibrahim, a Committee comprising respectable persons of the locality was formed in the year 1963 with Yaseen Ali as the President and the petitioner as the Secretary, and there was an order dated 18-7-63 in this regard. The petitioner claims that since 1963 onwards, he along with the Committee members looked after the affairs of the Mosque and was managing the same. After the death of the President, Yaseen Ali, in the year 1970, a new Committee was formed with Syed Moinuddin as its President, who continued till 1973. It appears that Md. Asgar Ashraf became the President in the year 1974, and functioned as such subsequently. The petitioner claims that he and the Committee, while managing the Mosque, developed it, arranged to put up double storied building, and now it is a big building with several mulgis let out to tenants, which are yielding sufficient income in addition to other income from thousands of worshippers. The petitioner claims that accounts are being maintained regularly with regard to the income of the Mosque and the Wakf funds are being regularly remitted to the Wakf Board, and whenever a new Committee was constituted it was being intimated to the Wakf Board, which was acknowledged by them. Even the remittance of the charges for three years from 1-1-94 to 31-12-96 is said to have been acknowledged by receipt dated 4-1-94. It appears, according to the petitioner, one Syed Khaja, was interfering in the peaceful prayers conducted in the Mosque and also in other activities, which was attempted to be stopped, and therefore, he approached the Wakf Board, based upon which the impugned orders have been passed without any basis or legal support. It is also contended that the impugned orders are passed without giving an opportunity to the petitioner or the existing committee in regard to the allegations made by the said person or others before passing the impugned orders, and thus there has been violation of the principles of natural justice in passing such an order.

( 2 ) SR. Mirza Imamulla Baig, learned advocate for the petitioner has contended that the impugned orders are illegal as it is the Chairman who has passed the order, whereas the law contemplates that such an order should be passed by the Wakf Board, which is quite different from the Chairman himself. He has also contended that even assuming the Chairman has passed such an order, it could not have been done without giving opportunity to the petitioner or the Committee, particularly when serious allegations are made touching the status and reputation of the persons involved and concerned with the Mosque, which left a stigma on them, and therefore, the impugned proceedings are vitiated and cannot be allowed to be in force in law.

( 3 ) THE learned Advocates Sri A. Narendra, appearing for respondent No. 1 and Sri Mohammed Azizullah Khan for respondent No. 2 have contended that in the first place there was no Committee at all, much less the office bearers, the Secretary or any other person as President, and in the second

Click Here to Read the rest of this document