(B. Prakash Rao, J.)

This Writ Petition came up before us on a reference made by the learned Single Judge, Honourable Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, to be consdiered by a Division Bench in relation to a decision reported in Citizens Welfare Organisation, Hyderabad, v. The Government of A.P., rep. by Secretary, Revenue (Wakf), Hyderabad 1989 (2) ALT 524, of His Lordships Honourable Sri Justice K.Ramaswamy (as he then was), which relates to remuneration/fees of Naib Kazis. Heard Ms. Manjari.S.Ganu and Sri T.S.Praveen Kumar, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. M.A.K.Mukheed, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Wakf Board and the learned Government Pleaders for Social Welfare and Minority Welfare appearing on behalf of the respondents.

The brief account of the facts, which arise in these proceedings, are that the petitioners herein consisting in all about twenty four {24} persons claiming to be Naib Kazis, who have been appointed by the respective Kazis for the respective areas, filed this Writ Petition against the State and the A.P. Wakf Board, inter alia, seeking writ of Mandamus to declare G.O.Ms.No.276 dated 11.03.1986, G.O.Ms.No.3 Minorities Welfare (Wakf) Department, dated 17.12.1993 as well as memorandum No.2Sj 258/Wakf 2(A2)/97-5 dated 25.11.1997 and also G.O.Rt.No.273 Minorities Welfare (Wakf-2) Department, dated 25.11.1997, as illegal, arbitrary and ultra vires of the powers of the respondent under the Kazis Act, 1880 {“the Act” for brevity}, and consequently, to declare the same as unenforceable.

The case of the petitioners, in short compass reference, is that Qazi Syed Abdullah Mohammad, the first petitioner herein, President of Naib Kazis called Anjuman-E.Nayebeen Quzzath, Zila Mohammednagar-WO-Bara Mahlath, Hyderabad A.P., 10-1-972 A.C.Guards Lines, Hyderabad, states that common petition is being filed since grievance is one and the same, where they sought to challenge the power of the respondents to fix and stipulate the Nikah fees of Kazi and Naib Kazi and the orders of the first respondent in the aforesaid proceedings. According to them, in Mohammedan Law, Kazi hold a considerable importance in the community and the presence of Kazi at the time of celebration of marriage, divorce and performance of certain other rites and ceremonies is quite essential, as required by each Mohammedan. Therefore, the Kazi performs certain religious and ceremonial duties. Referring to the objects under the said Act mentioned about the position as existed prior to the enforcement of the said Act, stated that the regulations were in force relating to Hindu and Mohammedan Law officers and to the office of the Kazi-ul-Kuzaat and of Kazi and such appointments were approved by the State. These regulations were repelled by Act XI of 1864 and therefore, subsequently, it was felt need for a comprehensive Legislation and the present Act of Kazis Act, 1880, was enacted. By taking queue from the provisions under the said Act, it is stated that all the duties and functions of Kazi are purely religious and ceremonial and there is no power statutorily conferred on the respondents herein to fix any fees.

There is no dispute in regard to the extent of jurisdiction for each such Kazi and down below, the Naib Kazi appointed by the said Kazi. Therefore, in short, the case of the petitioners is to the effect that under the impugned proceedings the attempt on the part of the first respondent herein in fixing the fee is wholly ultra view and totally without jurisdiction.

They further submitted that the Association of Naib Kazis submitted a representation on 29.07.1980 and thereafter, the second respondent-A.P. Wakf Board, as per the proceedings in Memo No.1186/Wakf/80-10 dated 26.11.1982, informed that in the absence of any provision, the Government has no jurisdiction to fix the fees for Naib Kazis. Yet the impugned proceedings have been issued in G.O.Ms.Nos.276 (Revenue) Wakf Department, dated 11.03