::1:: APHC010199522014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] MONDAY ,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 21727/2014 Between: Modukuri Eswari Devi, ...PETITIONER AND Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 2. S ARIFULLAH (SC FOR AP WAQF BOARD) ::2:: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 21727/2014 This Court made the following ORDER: 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “..to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF CERTIORARI calling for entire records connected to proceedings No.F.No.23/PROT/WG/2012-136, dated 23.05.2014 issued by the 2nd respondent, examine the same and set it aside after declaring the same as illegal, irregular, irrational, without jurisdiction, violative of principles of natural justice and provisions of The Waqf Act, 1995 and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from his land of Ac 1.70 cents covered by Sy.No.272 of Pasivedala Revenue Village of Kovvur Mandal in West Godavari District and pass..” 2. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the impugned order passed by the Respondent No.2, dated 23.05.2014, is without jurisdiction and contrary to the Section 54(3) of the Waqf Act, 1995. Section 54(3) of the Waqf Act contemplates that any alleged encroachment can only be removed on by way of making an application by the Respondent No.2 before the Waqf Tribunal. However, without ::3:: adhering to the said procedure, the Respondent No.2 straight away directed the eviction of the Petitioner. 3. At the time of admission, after hearing both the counsel, this Court was pleased to pass an interim direction on 28.07.2014. Since then the Petitioner has been in possession and enjoyment of the property. If the Respondents still intend to evict the Petitioner on the allegation of encroachment of the Waqf property, the procedure contemplated under Section 54(3) of Waqf Act, 1995, must be adhered to. 4. The learned Standing Counsel for the Respondents submits that in the Section 54(3) of the Waqf Act, 1995 is prescribes a mandatory procedure pursuant to which the Respondent No.2 already submitted an application before the Waqf Tribunal seeking for the removal of encroachments from Waqf Property. But, so far neither such application is ordered nor any notice has been served against the Petitioner and same is pending for consideration before the Tribunal. Therefore, in view of the submissions made by both the counsel and on perusal of the material on record, without going into merits of the case this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage directing both the parties to resolve their disputes by way of adjudication before the statutory Tribunal i.e., Waqf Tribunal since the application U/s 54(3) is pending as stated supra. Hence, the Respondents herein are restrained from interference of possession of the Petitioner against the subject ::4:: property till further orders of the Tribunal. Having regard to the submissions of both the counsel, the Petitioner is also at liberty to any additional developments or arguments before the Tribunal. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed. . ______________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA Dt:20.01.2025 krk ::5:: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA 77 WRIT PETITION NO: 21727/2014 20.01.2025 krk