Back
NYAPATHY VIJAY
Vanka Thrimurthulu – Appellant
Versus
District Collector And District Magistrate – Respondent
ORDER :
(Nyapathy Vijay, J.) :
Introduction: The genesis for the present batch of revisions is the order passed by the District Collector, East Godavari District (as it then was) under Section 52(2) of the A.P. Wakf Act, 1995 (for short ‘the Act’) vide proceedings No.REV-HSECOMIS/1/2017, dated 13.03.2017 directing the Tahsildar, Mummidivaram to hand over lands specified therein in the possession of these petitioners to the Inspector Auditor, Wakfs, East Godavari District within 30 days.
2. This order of eviction was challenged before the A.P. State Wakf Tribunal, City Civil Court Campus at Hyderabad in Appeal filed under Section 52 (4) of the Act. The Wakf Tribunal passed orders dismissing the appeals and hence, the present revisions were filed under Section 83 of the Act.
3. As the issues involved in all the cases are similar, this Court heard the arguments in all the revisions and for the sake of convenience, C.R.P.No.7399 of 2018 is taken to be the lead case for narration of facts.
4. The facts leading to the present revision:
The Inspector Auditor, Wakfs, East Godavari District had submitted a report on 24.07.2002 that wakf properties of Mummidivaram mosque of an extent of Ac.18.
Summary eviction under the A.P. Wakf Act is not permissible in the presence of bona fide disputes regarding property title, necessitating a full trial instead.
The court established that a determination by the Wakf Board under Section 27 of the 1954 Act is final and cannot be revisited, reinforcing the principle of res judicata in property claims.
The court determined that a 41-year delay in issuing a notification declaring land as wakf property was unreasonable, rendering it invalid, and affirmed that such matters could be addressed in writ p....
(1) In a Revision Petition scope of consideration is limited and judgment/order under challenge can be interfered only in event of there being perversity seen on face of order and if conclusion reach....
Valid Waqf claims must include specific property details in gazette notifications; failure on this point allows third-party rights. High Court preserves property rights despite Waqf claims.
The jurisdiction for disputes concerning Wakf properties lies exclusively with the Wakf Tribunal, not civil courts, reinforcing the necessity for timely legal action under the WAKF ACT.
Point of Law : The definition of the word ‘encroachment' under Section 54 of the Wakf Act and in para.7 to 12 defined the word ‘encroacher' and the power of Wakf Board under Section 54 of the Wakf Ac....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
