IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
Alok Aradhe, C.J., Anil Kumar Jukanti, J.
Viceroy Hotels Limited and others - Petitioners
Versus
Telangana State Wakf Board, Hyderabad and others - Respondents
Writ Petition Nos.8431 and 11730 of 2014
Decided On : 25-04-2024
Wakf - Property Claims - Wakf Act, 1954, Section 27; Wakf Act, 1995, Section 54 - The court emphasized the finality of the Wakf Board's determination under Section 27 of the 1954 Act, which binds the Board and prohibits re-examination of the property status after a significant lapse of time.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged the Wakf Board's notification and proceedings claiming the subject property as Wakf property, despite previous determinations stating it was not. The case involved multiple claims and legal proceedings over decades regarding the property in question.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Wakf Board's repeated claims were barred by the principle of res judicata, as the property had been previously determined not to be Wakf property. The addendum notification was deemed invalid due to excessive delay and lack of proper procedure.
Issues: Whether the Wakf Board could reassert claims over the property after previous determinations and whether the addendum notification was valid.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Wakf Board's determination under Section 27 of the 1954 Act was final and could not be revisited, thus prohibiting further claims on the property.
Result: The addendum notification was quashed, and the Wakf Board was prohibited from proceeding with the eviction suit.
ORDER :
Alok Aradhe, C.J.
In these petitions, the petitioners have assailed the validity of the action of Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board in issuing the addendum notification dated 23.08.2007 and in instituting a proceeding under Section 54 of the Wakf Act, 1995. On account of commonality of the issues, the writ petitions were heard analogously and are being decided by this common order. For the facility of reference, facts of W.P.No.8431 of 2014 are being referred to.
(i) Relevant Facts:
2. Facts giving rise to filing of the writ petition in nutshell are that a patta was granted by the Board of Revenue on 07.02.1958 in accordance with the then extant laws in respect of land measuring Ac.4.04 guntas in Sy.Nos.181 and 182 at Kavadiguda Village, Hyderabad to one Mohammed Gulam Dastagir. The subject matter of W.P.No.8431 of 2014 is the land measuring 14,400 square yards i.e., Acs.2.97 guntas in Sy.Nos.181 and 182/1, situated at Kavadiguda Village, Hyderabad, whereas the subject matter of W.P.No.11730 of 2014 is land measuring 1500 square yards in Sy.Nos.181 and 182/1 situated at Kavadiguda Village, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as “the subject property”).
(ii) First round of claim by the Wakf Board:
3. The Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board conducted an enquiry under Section 27 of the Wakf Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as “the 1954 Act”) and determined vide resolution dated 05.10.1958 that the subject property is not Wakf property. After the demise of Mohd. Gulam Dastagir, his legal representatives have executed an agreement of sale in the month of December, 1963 in favour of Smt. D.S.Laxmi and Smt. G.Mohini Kumari. Thereafter, on 03.08.1964, the legal heirs of late Mohd. Gulam Dastagir have executed a sale deed in respect of land measuring 14,400 square yards (Acs.2.97 guntas) of Sy.Nos.181 and 182 at Kavadiguda, Hyderabad, in favour of Smt. D.S.Laxmi and Smt. G.Mohini Kumari.
(iii) Second round of claim by the Wakf Board:
4. Thereafter, one Mr.Abdul Gafoor had instituted a civil suit, namely, O.S.No.2391 of 1964 on 29.06.1964 on the file of I Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad on the ground that the subject property was a Wakf property endowed through an alleged Muntakhab dated 21 Khurdad 1355 Fasli i.e., 1945. The trial Court vide order dated 31.08.1965 returned the plaint on the ground of deficit court fee and lack of pecuniary jurisdiction. Against the aforesaid order, a revision petition, namely, C.R.P.No.2097 of 1965 was preferred before the Andhra Pradesh High Court, which was dismissed.
(iv) Third round of claim by the Wakf Board:
5. Thereafter, the Wakf Board issued a show cause notice dated 11.08.1966 to Smt. D.S.Laxmi and Smt. G.Mohini Kumari claiming the subject property to be the Wakf property and proposed an enquiry to be conducted in that regard. The said show cause notice was challenged by Smt. D.S.Laxmi and Smt. G.Mohini Kumari in a writ petition, namely, W.P.No.1772 of 1966 before the Andhra Pradesh High Court. During the pendency of the writ petition, the writ petitioners namely, Smt. D.S.Laxmi and Smt. G.Mohini Kumari transferred the subject property in favour of one Krishna Cold Drinks Private Limited. The Andhra Pradesh High Court by an order dated 05.09.1968 quashed the proceedings initiated by the Andhra Pradesh Wakf Board on the ground that once a determination under Section 27 of the 1954 Act has already been made that the subject property is not a Wakf property, it is not permissible for the Andhra Pradesh Wakf Board to re-examine the issue again.
6. Sri Krishna Bottlers Private Limited filed a declaration before the Special Officer under the Urban Land Ceiling Act, 1976 seeking exemption from the provisions of the aforesaid Act. This aforesaid exemption was granted vide G.O.Ms.No.888, dated 22.10.1981.
7. The Wakf Board published a Gazette Notification in A.P. Gazette at Sl.No.1530 wherein a property by description of “Mosque Sultan with Graveyard and land in Sy.No.82/2 at Hyderabad City,
Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. v. Dunlop India Ltd.
Essar Steel India Ltd. Committee of Creditors vs. Satish Kumar Gupta(2020) 8 SCC 531.
Meher Rusi Dalal vs. Union of India
Piara Singh v. State of Punjab
S.Govinda Menon vs. the Union of India
T.Kalimurthi vs. Five Gori Thaikal Wakf
Thirumala Tirupati Devasthanams v. Thallapaka Ananthacharyulu
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....
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 main legal point established in the judgment is that the Original Gazette Notification of Wakf properties attains finality, and any subsequent Errata Notification issued after a long lapse of tim....
The irreversibility of wakf property transactions based on the Wakf Act's provisions prohibits alienation, upholding the integrity of religious and charitable purposes over contested claims.
The impugned addendum notification was issued without proper enquiry, violated principles of natural justice, and lacked sufficient evidence to establish the subject lands as wakf properties.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.