SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(AP) 449

2011 (5) ALD 407
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, J.
Mir Qamar Hasan Razvi
v.
A.P. State Wakf Board, Hyderabad
WP No.16064 of 2011
Decided On : Twenty Second Day of June, 2011

Advocates Appeared:
M. Mehdi Hussain, Counsel for the Petitioner;
Mir Masood Khan, Counsel for the Respondent.

Headnote:

Constitution of India - Wakf Act, 1995 - Section 63, 83 - Executing a decree or order - Ancient Wakf Institution, namely, extent of 300 acres is attached to the said wakf institution. According to the petitioner, the office of is hereditary and his father rendered service to the said institution till his death in the petitioner approached the Wakf Board to recognize him as hereditary .There being no action on the part of the Wakf Board, he filed Writ Petition said writ petition came to be disposed of directing the Wakf Board to take action on the representations by conducting an enquiry. Pursuant to the direction given in the writ petition, the Wakf Board appointed an Enquiry Officer, who conducted enquiry and submitted his report. Ultimately, proceedings came to be issued appointing the petitioner as to the said institution under Section 63 of the appointment of the petitioner as came to be published in Andhra Pradesh Gazette. In the Gazette, the term of the office of the petitioner as has been indicated as one year –Held, Tribunal has been conferred with the power to determine any dispute, question or other matter relating to a Wakf or Wakf Property under the Act and acts as a civil Court for all purposes, this Court, in exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, cannot permit a party to bypass such statutory remedy and assign itself the role of statutory authority or Tribunal by dealing with the disputed questions of fact or title. It is only after the issue or dispute is determined by the Tribunal at the first instance, the High Court, in exercise of the power under the proviso to sub-section (9) of Section 83 of the Act gets jurisdiction and can go into the correctness, legality or propriety of such determination and may confirm, reverse or modify such determination or pass such other order it may think fit. Therefore unless the party aggrieved of the orders of the CEO has availed of the alternative remedy available to him under the Statute and the Tribunal has determined the issue or dispute or the nature of the property as provided under the provisions of the Act, this Court;, cannot go into the question of validity of the orders passed by the Chief Executive Officer - petition is dismissed

ORDER :-

There is an ancient Wakf Institution, namely, Kohe Imam-e-Zamin (AS) in Tirumulgerry Village and Mandai, Hyderabad. An extent of 300 acres is attached to the said wakf institution. According to the petitioner, the office of mutawalli is hereditary and his father rendered service as mutawalli to the said institution till his death in the year 1996. The petitioner approached the Wakf Board to recognize him as hereditary mutawalli. There being no action on the part of the Wakf Board, he filed Writ Petition 6136 of 2003. The said writ petition came to be disposed of on 18.4.2003 directing the Wakf Board to take action on the representations by conducting an enquiry. Pursuant to the direction given in the writ petition, the Wakf Board appointed an Enquiry Officer, who conducted enquiry and submitted his report on 29.6.2003. Ultimately, proceedings came to be issued on 4.6.2008 appointing the petitioner as mutawalli to the said institution under Section 63 of the Wakf Act, 1995 (for brevity, "the Act"). The appointment of the petitioner as mutawalli came to be published in Andhra Pradesh Gazette dated 3.7.2008. In the Gazette, the term of the office of the petitioner as mutawalli has been indicated as one year. Therefore, he submitted another application on 22.11.2008 to recognize him as hereditary mutawalli under Section 42 of the Act. The Wakf Board considered the representation dated 22.11.2008 and issued proceedings on 5.1.2009 appointing him as mutawalli of the institution under Section 42 of the Act.

2. While he was rendering the services as mutawalli, a committee was appointed by the Board to conduct ceremonies for a period of three days under proceedings bearing No.27/KIZ/DM/2006/ Zone-II, dated 25.7.2009. The petitioner questioned the said. proceedings by filing Writ Petition No.15071 of 2009 and he also moved WPMP No.19800 of 2009 seeking for interim relief. An interim order came to be passed in WPMP No.19800 of 2009 on 28th July, 2009. Subsequently, the said writ petition came to be dismissed as infructuous on 2.12.2010. The petitioner also filed OS No.101 of 2009 before the Andhra Pradesh Wakf Tribunal, Hyderabad seeking injunction against Shankar Lal Yadav and Dhan Sing Yadav and obtained an order of status quo, vide orders in IA No.302 of 2009 on 26th August, 2009. While so, the Chief Executive Officer, A.P. State Wakf Board issued proceedings vide F.No.36/B2/RR/2007/Z-II, dated 7.6.2011, where under the management of the institution has been taken over by the Board under Section 65 of the Act and directed Janab Mir later Ali Sajidi, Assistant Secretary, A.P. State Wakf Board to take complete charge of the institution along with attached properties and manage them till further orders. For better appreciation, I may refer the relevant portion of the proceedings dated 7.6.2011, which reads as hereunder :-

"In the reference 2nd read above, Janab Mir Qamar Hasan Razvi had filed WP No.15071 of 2009 for constitution of Jashan Committee vide Proc.No.27/KIZ/DM/06/Z-II, dated 25.7.2009 and obtained interim order in WPMP No.19800/2009, dated: 28.7.2009 and the same WP was disposed on 2.12.2010.

In the reference 3rd read above, the l/c. Task Force, APSWB has submitted a report stating that Janab Mir Qamar Has{Jn Razvi

(1) has allowed the labour in Sama Khana without permission of the Board as the same Sama Khana is for Zaireen of the subject Wakf Institution.

(2) the above said labour are engaged in construction work.

(3) The above said mutawalli has raised the construction wall without permission of the Board.

(4) The above said Mutawalli has allowed to 1. V. Krishna 2. G. Yadagiri 3. V. Sushella 4. V. Chandraiah R/o. Subash Nagar 5. Ram Narvade R/o Chennapuram for quarrying without permission of the A.P. State Wakf Board. As such, the I/c. Task Force Team has suggested to take further necessary action as deems fit for the above said lapses of Janab Mir Qamar Hasan Razvi.

In view of the above lapses, the matter has been placed





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top