This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 06.06.2012 passed by the A.P. Wakf Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short 'the Tribunal') in I.A.No.376 of 2011 in O.S.No.80 of 2011.

The facts that gave rise to filing of the writ petition are as under:

The Central Government has taken up the work of widening National Highway No.9, between Vijayawada and Hyderabad, to a four lane road. The highway passes through Kattangur Village of Nalgonda District. There exists a mosque, by name Masjid-e-Mahammadia, and appurtenant land in that village, abutting the highway.

A notification under Section 3-A of the National Highways Act 1956 (for short 'the Act') was published on 01.06.2010 in the gazette and on 26.10.2010 in the newspapers, proposing to acquire various properties on both sides of road including the structures. An extent of 61 square yards of land belonging to the mosque was notified, since it came under alignment of the road. The petitioner herein was named as the competent authority. After the formalities provided for under Sections 3-B and C of the Act were complied with, a declaration under Section 3-D of the Act was published on 19.10.2010. The award in respect of the property of the Masjid was passed on 07.05.2011 in favour of the Chief Executive Officer of the Wakf Board, the 1st respondent, since the Masjid is under its control and administration and a sum of Rs.7,39,484/-was awarded. Demand draft covering that amount was forwarded to the 1st respondent on 07.11.2011. However, the 1st respondent returned the D.D., through covering letter dated 27.08.2011 stating that no notice, as contemplated under Section 97 of the Wakf Act, was issued, and the procedure prescribed under Section 9-3(10) of the Land Acquisition Act was not followed. He further stated that the demolition/removal of the Masjid would be illegal and unlawful. A request was made to avoid the acquisition.

Two persons by name Ghulam Shafiuddin Deshmukh and Zahinulabuddin Siddiqui (Muthavalli of the Mosque) filed W.P.No.7684 of 2010, challenging the action of respondents 1 and 2 therein, in conducting survey of the land around the Masjid, without initiating proceedings under the relevant provisions of law. The writ petition was dismissed on 17.11.2011 taking note of the fact that no objections were received to the notification issued under Section 3-A of the Act proposing to acquire the property; declaration under Section 3-D of the Act was published, and an award was passed on 16.04.2011.

The 1st petitioner in W.P.No.7684 of 2010 i.e. Ghulam Shafiuddin Deshmukh filed another writ petition, being W.P.No.21811 of 2011 feeling aggrieved by the passing of the award, in favour of the State Wakf Board. In a way, he claimed the right to receive the compensation. This Court dismissed the writ petition through order dated 27.07.2011 holding that the property vests in the Wakf Board and the compensation is payable to that organisation alone.

About two months thereafter the 1st respondent herein filed O.S.No.80 of 2011 before the Tribunal, claiming the relief of perpetual injunction, to restrain the petitioner herein, or anybody claiming through him, from acquiring or demolishing any portion of the Mosque. I.A.No.376 of 2012 was filed for temporary injunction. The petitioner herein was impleaded as sole defendant. Respondents 2 and 3 got themselves imleaded as plaintiffs 2 and 3. The National Highways Authority of India, was impleaded as 3rd defendant, in the suit.

In the plaint, as well as in the affidavit filed in support of the I.A., the case of the 1st respondent was that the Masjid was constructed over a century ago, it was serving the spiritual needs of local Mussalies, and that the petitioner herein sought to acquire portion of the property of the Masjid, without following the relevant provisions of law. It was also mentioned that no notices, as contemplated under Section 91 of the Wakf Act, or Sections 9(3) and (10) of the Land Acquisition Act w