IN THE HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
Surepalli Nanda, J.
Ahmed Shujauddin Quadri - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Telangana & others - Respondents
Writ Petition Nos.38879 of 2022 and 34194 OF 2017
Decided On : 30-09-2024
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's complaint against additional khazi (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. suspension of khazi and background of allegations (Para 6 , 8 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. argument on legal liability and natural justice (Para 12 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. vicarious liability as per recent case law (Para 21 , 22) |
| 5. orders for action following legal conclusions (Para 23) |
ORDER :
Surepalli Nanda, J.
W.P.No. 38879 of 2022 :-
Heard Sri A.Venkatesh, learned senior designated counsel representing Sri P.Pandu Ranga Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner on record, learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1 and Sri Mohammad Obaid Mohiuddin, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2.
2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under in W.P.No. 38879 of 2022 :
“.........to issue a Writ, order or direction and more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not acting upon the Report of the Assistant Commissioner of Police dt 14.07.2021 and not initiating action against the 2nd respondent as being illegal arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the 1st respondent to forthwith act upon the Report of Assistant Commissioner of Police dt. 14.07.2021 and take effective and preventive steps against the 2nd respondent and pass........”
3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, as per the averments made by the petitioner in the affidavit filed by the petitioner in support of the present Writ Petition No. 38879 of 2022, is as under:
a) It is the case of the petitioner that, the petitioner herein is a Government Qazi appointed by the 1st respondent and since the date of appointment the petitioner had been rendering his services as Qazi of Jahanuma Zone (Ghazibanda). The 2nd respondent herein is Additional Qazi of Qila Mohammed Nagar and was appointed in the year 2008 vide G.O.Ms.No.2 and pursuant thereto the said additional Qazi had appointed Naib Qazis to assist him in performing the marriages. However, there are several instances where the office of the Additional Qazi is found to have involved in performing the marriages of young Muslim girls with old aged Arab Sheikhs. Several FIRs were registered against the Naib Qazis for performing the Child marriages. However, it is pertinent to mention here that, in all the FIRs only Naib Qazis are being shown as accused and the Chief Qazi under whose Jurisdiction the said heinous crimes were committed is being let off.
b) Subsequently, in the year 2017 the 2nd respondent herein was suspended for performing the marriages of young girls with old aged Arab Shiekhs and even after suspension, three more FIRs were registered for performing the child marriages vide FIR No.201/2019 on the file of Kanchanbagh Police Station, FIR No. 139/2020 on the file of Rein Bazar Police Station and FIR.No. 2/2022 on the file of Kalapatthar Police Station. However, no actions were taken against the 2nd respondent. Therefore, the petitioner herein being a concerned Qazi had brought to the notice of the respondents herein by a written representation dated 12.03.2021 with regard to the nature of crimes that were committed and the connivance of the Government Qazi with Naib Qazis and his repeated excuse of not being aware or cannot be held responsible for the acts of Naib Qazis. However, the said representation was not considered and no action had been initiated.
c) Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed W.P.No.10231 of 2021 before this court and this court disposed the said writ petition vide order dated 27.04.2021 directing the 3rd respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 12.03.2021 and pass appropriate orders. Pursuant to the said orders, enquiry was conducted and report dated 14.07.2021 was submitted to the Commissioner of Police, bringing it to the notice of the Commissioner of Police with regard to the 6 FIRs and CCs registered and pending against the Naib Qa
Ravasaheb Alias Ravasahebgouda and Others Vs. State of Karnataka
Pushpabai Purshottam Udeshi and Others Vs. Ranjit Ginning and Pressing Co.Pvt.Ltd. and Another
The court affirmed vicarious liability of public officials for acts committed by subordinates in official capacity, directing action under relevant provisions of law for accountability.
Removal of a Kazi under the Kazi’s Act, 1880, requires due process and can be based on misconduct associated with their office, including failure to oversee Naib Kazis adequately.
The inaction of the government in appointing a petitioner as Kazi is arbitrary and violates principles of natural justice, holding that prior dismissal from Naib Kazi does not disqualify one for Kazi....
The dismissal of a Naib Qazi does not violate principles of natural justice where no legal or statutory rights exist for the position under Kazi's Act.
The court affirmed that the appointment of Khazis must follow the procedures outlined in the Khazi Act 1880, emphasizing local consultation and government authority.
The appointment of multiple Kazis must adhere to territorial demarcation and established procedures, with mere recommendations not infringing on existing appointments unless formally overlapping.
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.