Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 18980 (AP)

Syed Mohiuddin Peera @ Khaja Mohiuddih, v. The Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board,

WP/25100/2016 · 2025-02-11

Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

::1:: APHC010262912016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] TUESDAY ,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 25100/2016 Between: Syed Mohiuddin Peera @ Khaja Mohiuddih, ...PETITIONER AND The Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SUBHANI S M Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. SHAIK KHAJA BASHA ::2:: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA W.P.No.25100 of 2016 This Court made the following ORDER: The case of the Petitioner is that the Petitioner was appointed as permanent hereditary Mutawalli Under Section 42 of the Waqf Act, 1995 on 11.08.1998, wherein the Petitioner has been continuing as Mutawalli in respect of subject Waqf Property. To the surprise of the Petitioner, 1st Respondent issued proceedings dated 02.07.2016 trying to takeover the Management of the subject Waqf Property. That was assailed in the present Writ Petition, wherein this Hon’ble Court passed interim orders dated 29.07.2016. 2. In view of the interim orders of this Court dated 29.07.2016, the Petitioner has been continuing as Mutawalli pending Writ Petition. 3. Learned Standing Counsel submits that the Respondents are not intended to interfere with the day-to-day affairs of the subject Waqf property since the Petitioner has been continuing as hereditary Mutawalli U/s 42 of the Waqf Act, 1995. ::3:: 4. In view of clear and categorical statement made by learned Standing Counsel that the Respondents are not interfering with the day- to-day affair of the Dargah Hzt. Syed Shah Quadri (Rh) situated at Prakasam Barrage, Vijayawada City and with the duties of Mutawalli, neither further orders nor further adjudication is necessary in this Writ Petitioner and same may be closed as grievances were redressed. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. ______________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA 11.02.2025 Krk ::4:: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA 116 W.P.No.25100 of 2016 11.02.2025 krk <