APHC010493162014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION Between: Chitturi Subbarao and Others Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board and Others Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 2. SHAIK KHAJA BASHA The Court made the following: 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 21728/2014 Chitturi Subbarao and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): GP FOR REVENUE (AP) SHAIK KHAJA BASHA The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3329] THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA ...PETITIONER(S) ...RESPONDENT(S) 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 21728/2014 ORDER: The present 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/2012-85 and F.No.23/PROT/WG/2012-87, dated 23.05.2014 issued by 2nd respondent, examine the same and set aside such order 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 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from their lands of Ac.0.70 cents; Ac.0.75 cents and Ac.1.05 cents Ac. 2.50 cents covered by survey number 268 and 269 of Pasivedala Revenue Village of Kovvur Mandal in West Godavari District and pass…” 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners 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 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 Wakf Tribunal. However, without adhering to the said procedure, the respondent No.2 straight away directed the eviction of the petitioners. Hence, the writ petition. 3 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 petitioners have been in possession and enjoyment of the property. If the respondents still intend to evict the petitioners on the allegation of encroachment of the Wakf 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 Section 54(3) of Waqf Act, 1995 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 by the petitioners from the wakf property. But, so far the Hon’ble tribunal neither proceeded with such application nor notice has been served against petitioners, same is pending for consideration. 05. 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 has 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., Wakf Tribunal, since the application under Section 54(3) is pending as stated supra. Hence, the respondents herein are restrained from interference of possession of the petitioners against the subject property till further orders of the Tribunal. Having regard to the submissions of both the learned counsel, the petitioners are also at liberty to file any documents and to submit to any additional developments or arguments before the Tribunal. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 4 Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. ______________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA 23.01.2025 KKV 5 247 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION No.21728 of 2014 Dated: 23.01.2025 KKV 6