SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 34963

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA, J
Syed Maqbool Hussain Jaffery – Appellant
Versus
Telangana State Wakf Board – Respondent
WP/19523/2023



HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.19523 OF 2023

O R D E R :

The 2nd respondent – Chief Executive Officer, Telangana State Waqf Board issued Proceedings F. No. 299/TOW/NLG/2015/Z- III-VOL-II, dated 15.06.2023 appointing the 3rd respondent as Muthawalli of Ashoorkhana-e- Shazada Qasim along with Graveyard & Karbala Maidan in Survey Nos. 315, 462, 463, 467, 470 and 471 comprising an extent of Ac.10.12 guntas (dry) and Ac.5.20 guntas (West) totalling an extent of Ac.15.22 guntas situated at Kondamadugu Village, Bibinagar Mandal, Yadradri Bhuvanagiri District. Alleging the said proceedings as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice, this Writ Petition is filed.

2. It is the case of petitioner that he has been taking care of Ashoorkhana-e-Shazada Qasim and performing muharram rituals and duties every year continuously with great spiritual and devotional interest to the full satisfaction of one and all in our village and also neighboring villages along with his brother Syed Muzafar Hussain Jaffery. It is stated that on his application, the 2nd respondent initially appointed petitioner as Muthawalli under Section 63 of the Waqf Act, 1995 (for short, ‘the Act’) for one year vide Proceedings dated 30.04.2013 and thereafter, he was made permanent Muthawalli vide order dated

13.12.2013.

It is stated initially, father of petitioner was Muthawalli of the said Ashoorkahana. While so, the 2nd respondent on receipt of certain complaints from unconcerned persons, initiated inquiry which is subject matter of O.A. No. 5 of 2016. On 21.05.2014 the lower division clerk of the Tribunal made the following observation as "....... Jashan and Nazro Niaz in the Ashoorkhana, he also not paid the electricity bill and there is a power cut in Ashoorkhana since then. There have been repeatedly increased of work of plotting on the left out wakf land of Ashoorkhana without any prior permission of wakf board of Ex-Mutawalli. The applicant request to take the Ashoorkhana in the direct management of AP State Wakf Board under Section 65 of the Wakf Qct 1995 earliest as possible" to which the special officer on 29.05.2014 endorsed 'take it under DM"

It is also stated that after appointment of petitioner as Muthawalli, paternal cousin of petitioner i.e. late Syed Raza Hussain and Syed Hyder Hussain Jaffery (father of the 3rd respondent) lodged a complaint dated 30.04.2012 against petitioner before the 2nd respondent alleging that he sold lands of the institution; enquiry was conducted and Enquiry Officer submitted report dated 04.08.2015 resulting in consequential proceedings dated 22.01.2016 whereunder, the 1st respondent had taken Ashoorkhana under the direct management of Waqf Board till further orders. Challenging the same, petitioner filed O.A. Nos. 100 and 101 of 2016 on the file of the Wakf Tribunal, Hyderabad which are pending adjudication. Petitioner further filed Writ Petition No. 12431 of 2016 challenging the action of Respondents 1 and 2 in taking the institution under the direct management of Wakf Board vide order dated 02.06.2014, 17.07.2014 and the said Writ Petition is pending. The 2nd respondent by proceedings dated 25.03.2014 kept petitioner in abeyance under Section 42 of the Act. However, the 2nd respondent vide proceedings dated 19.09.2014 stated that revised order dated 17.07.2014 was not complied with and directed petitioner to continue as Muthwalli of Ashoorkhana, hence, petitioner has been discharging the duties as Muthawalli.

The 1st respondent vide Memo dated 31.05.2023 directed petitioner to submit budget estimates for 2020-21, 2021-22 in respect of Ashoorkhana and also waqf fund with arrears up to 2022-2023. According to petitioner, the said memo itself speaks that petitioner is still discharging the functions as Muthawalli. As things stood thus, the 2nd respondent issued impugned proceedings duly appointing the 3rd respondent as muthawalli of Ashoorkahan. Petitioner was therefore, stated to have

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top