IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T.MADHAVI DEVI DATED: 12.03.2026 Between Syed Ahmed Mohiuddin @ Jeelani Pasha.

… Petitioner And The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Minorities Welfare Department, Secretariat Buildings at Hyderabad and Three Others.

… Respondents

ORDER

In this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents No.2 and 3 in passing Resolution No.529, dated 26.10.2024 in response to Item No.48 of 9^th Meeting of the Board in File No.16/Z1/T/HYD/2024, incorporating the name of the respondent No.4 as Muthawalli of the Waqf Institution namely Graveyard and Dargah Hazrath Makki Miya, notified in A.P.Gazette No.6-A, Supplement to Part-II dated 09.02.1989 at Page No.61, Sl.No.2245 with its attached properties on the rights of being hereditary by ignoring the reports of the respondent No.3 and his subordinates and also the representation of the petitioner dated 28.12.2018 requesting to appoint him as Muthawalli, as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and giving colourable exercise to his statutory powers and consequently, to set aside the said Resolution No.529, dated 26.10.2024 and direct the respondents No.2 and 3 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 28.12.2018 for appointment as Muthawalli of the aforesaid Waqf Institution and to pass such other order or orders in the interest of justice.

2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition are that the petitioner claims that his father Mr.Khaleel Pasha was the notified Muthawalli of the subject Waqf Institution, notified in A.P.Gazette No.6-A, supplement to Part-II, dated 09.02.1989 at page No.61, Sl.No.2245, with its attached properties and that the petitioner used to accompany his father in all day to day activities and was also looking after the religious duties of the Waqf Institution. It is stated that the petitioner also used to conduct Urs and monthly Fatiha. It is submitted that after the death of his father, the petitioner made several representations requesting the respondents No.2 and 3 to appoint him as Muthawalli of the subject Waqf Institution by incorporating his name in place of his father having obtained the copy of the succession and also NOC from legal heirs of his father. It is stated that respondent No.4 and his father, with an evil intention to usurp the said Waqf Institution, have also filed an application for Towliathship and used political influence and though respondent No.2 conducted an enquiry by appointing Waqf Board officials to give status report and that the report was given in favour of the petitioner, but in its 9^th Board Meeting in Item No.48, respondent No.2 has passed a Resolution No.529, dated 26.10.2024, appointing respondent No.4 as Muthawalli under Section 42 of the Waqf Act, 1995, by giving colourable exercise to his statutory powers. It is stated that after coming to know about the impugned Resolution dated 26.10.2024, the petitioner had sought information under RTI Act by filing an application dated 03.12.2024 and since the respondent No.4 was interfering into the administration of the Waqf Institution though he was not yet appointed as Muthawalli, he had requested respondent No.3 to take the subject Waqf Institution under his direct management under Section 65 of the Waqf Act, 1995, but no action was taken by respondent No.2. Averring that the petitioner has no other effective alternative remedy, this writ petition has been filed.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the (i) representation of the petitioner dated

28.12.2018, which was stated to have been received by the Waqf Board on 08.10.2024 as per the endorsement of receipt; (ii) the report of the Inspector Auditor of the Waqf Board dated 21.10.2024; (iii) the representation of respondent No.4, dated 12.12.2017; and also (iv) the representation of the petitioner r