ORDER :- The petitioner was appointed as a Kazi, for performing the marriages of Muslims (Shafayee sect) at Hyderabad, by the Government of A.P., the 1st respondent herein, through orders in G.O. Ms. No.606, Revenue (Wakf) Department, dated 27.6.1990. This appointment was made under the provisions of the Kazis Act, 1880 (for short "the Act"). Through its orders in G.O. Ms. No.757, dated 18.8.1990, the petitioner was permitted to perform the marriages of Arabs also, and the original order of appointment was accordingly modified.

2. The petitioner appointed a person by name Ahmed Sharif, as his Naib Kazi. The latter performed nikha of a woman, by name Haseena Begum, with one, Mr. JajJar Yakub Hussan Alzarouni, said to be an Arab Shaik. The woman submitted a complaint in Chandrayanagutta Police Station, alleging harassment in the hands of her husband. Soon thereafter, a news item appeared in the local dailies, on 27.5.2004.

3. The 1st respondent called for a report, from the A.P. Wakf Board, the 2nd respondent herein, on the subject, and through orders in G.O. Rt. No.240, dated 4.6.2004, it suspended the appointment of the petitioner as Kazi. This was followed by an enquiry by the 2nd respondent, against the petitioner, and a report dated 14.9.2004 was submitted. Taking the same, into account, the 1st respondent issued orders in G.O. Ms. No.11, Minorities Welfare (Wakf-II) Department, dated 2.4.2005, removing the petitioner from the post of Kazi. The petitioner challenges the same.

4. The petitioner contends that as a Kazi, his duty is only to verify whether the parties to the marriage have attained the stipulated age, and whether there exists the offer and acceptance, free from any external factors. He contends that the bride did not complain of any threat, coercion, or her displeasure for the marriage, and that her complaint came to be made, only on account of the alleged harassment made by her husband. He contends that the Kazi has absolutely no role to play in such matters, and there was no basis for the impugned order. He complains of violation of principles of natural justice and defects in the enquiry.

5. The 1st respondent filed a counter affidavit, stating that the petitioner ought to have ensured that the institution of marriage is not misused by the parties, and that on account of his negligence, a marriage between a girl of 19 years and an Arab Shaik of 73 years, took place. It is also stated that the petitioner failed to ascertain the correct information, as well as the status of the parties, particularly that of the bridegroom, at the time of marriage. The allegations as to the procedural lapses are denied.

6. The 2nd respondent filed a separate counter-affidavit. Apart from the points urged by the 1st respondent, the 2nd respondent stated that notwithstanding the limited role to be played by Kazi, the petitioner ought to have been careful, in ascertaining the ages of the parties, to a marriage. It is stated that in the course of enquiry, several instances, of the petitioner arranging for marriages between Arab Shaiks and innocent girls in the city of Hyderabad, have come to light. It is also al1eged that the petitioner and his Naibs have provided facilities to the Arab Shaiks for their stay and marriages, by col1ecting huge amounts. Various details of enquiry conducted against the petitioner that resulted in submission of enquiry report, dated 14.9.2004, are also furnished. It is pleaded that no procedural irregularity has taken place.

7. Sri K. Pratap Reddy, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the petitioner, submits that the proceedings initiated by the respondents, against the petitioner, are without any basis and are contrary to the provisions of law. He contends that no specific charge was framed against the petitioner, and the respondents were carried away by certain reports in the newspapers and they did not even care to verify the truth, or legality of such allegations. Learned Senior Counsel submits that the a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document