T. Amarnath Goud, J.

There are several directions of this Court in W.P.No.15068 of 2003 to list it along with C.R.P.No.2501 of 2002 by docket proceedings dated 4.12.2008, 17.06.2010 and 19.07.2010.

The subject matter in both these cases and also the parties are one and the same. Hence, with the consent of both parties, both the matters have been heard together and disposed of by a common order.

For the purpose of convenience, the parties are herein after referred to as they are arrayed in the writ petition.

2. C.R.P.No.2501 OF 2002:- This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the A.P. State Wakf Board, against the Judgment and Decree in O.S.No.30 of 1999 dated 13.06.2001 on the file of the A.P. Wakf Tribunal, Hyderabad, wherein the suit filed by the plaintiffs therein against the Wakf Board for grant of perpetual injunction was decreed.

C.R.P.M.P.No.8994 of 2017 was filed under Order I Rule 10 of Code of Civil Procedure, seeking to implead the petitioners therein as respondents 10 to 15 in the main Civil Revision Petition and this Court by order dated 24.08.2018 allowed the said petition.

3. W.P.No.15068 OF 2003:- This writ petition is filed, challenging the notice issued by the respondent, Wakf Board in File No. 1807/LG/RR/95, dated 18.6.2003, wherein the respondent appointed the enquiry officer under Section 54(3) of the Wakf Act, 1995 (for short, the Act) to cause enquiry into the matter as to whether the subject property is the Wakf property.

4. It is the case of the petitioners that originally the subject lands admeasuring Ac.2.24 guntas was purchased by one Mr.K.Mallanna father of Mr. K.M. Narasimha Rao, who is the husband of Smt.K.Padma Bai under 19 different registered sale deeds during the year 1932 onwards. After the death of K.Mallanna and K.M. Narasimha Rao, the petitioners purchased plots out of Ac.2.24 guntas in Sy.No.58, situated at Tirumalgherry Village, Secunderabad under a registered sale deed dated 21.8.2001 from Smt.K.Padma Bai and Others. While so, one Mohsin Ali Khan filed a complaint before the Wakf Board against their vendors with ulterior motive and hence the Wakf Board tried to interfere with the possession of their vendors. Their vendors filed O.S.No.30 of 1999 on the file of the Wakf Tribunal, Hyderabad to restrain the Wakf Board from interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment in respect of their lands and that the Wakf Tribunal after thorough trial, decreed the said suit on 13.06.2001. Thereafter, the petitioners purchased the said property from their vendors, vide registered sale deeds.

5. It is further stated that the Wakf Board issued a notice under Section 54(1) of the Act in File No.1807/LG/RR/95, dated 16.4.2002 to their vendor G.Mahender Reddy stating that the subject property is the wakf property and called for his explanation. He submitted his explanation dated 17.07.2002, stating that the said property is not the wakf property and they are not encroachers and it is private property purchased by them through registered sale deeds. There is a temple in portion of lands and that they are paying taxes to the Cantonment Board and also informed about the suit filed by them. After receipt of the above explanation, the Wakf Board again issued a notice under Section 54(3) of the Act in File No.1807/LG/RR/95, dated 14.10.2002, stating that the Board appointed under Section 71 of the Act one Mr.Jalaluddin as an enquiry officer with full powers that of a civil Court under the pretext that the property is the wakf property and to cause enquiry. On that they filed W.P.No.1074 of 2003 on the file of this Court, and the respondent Board for the reasons best known to it, withdrew the said notice dated 14.10.2002. In pursuance thereof, the writ petition was also withdrawn as there was no cause of action survives for adjudication.

6. It is further stated that the respondent Board once again issued a notice in File No.1807/LG/RR/95, dated 18.06.2003, which is impugned herein, appointing said Sye