APHC010021652016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] TUESDAY ,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 6057/2016 Between: Sultan Ali Baig ...PETITIONER AND The District Revenue Officer District Wald Officer And and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. T SRIKANTH REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. SHAIK KARIMULLAH (SC FOR WAKF BOARD RAYALASEEMA) 2. 3. A M QURESHI 4. S ARIFULLAH 5. MIR AQUEEL ALI The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO.6057 OF 2016 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking following relief: “..to declare the action of the 1st respondent in not implementing the proceedings in file no.637/PKM/ C/2013/Z-V/ Supple, dated 13.01.2016 issued by the 2nd respondent for taking action against the 4th respondent and consequently direct the 1st respondent to restrain the 4th respondent from cutting any crops on the lands belonging to the 5th respondent Wakf institution as being arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and contrary to the provisions of section 55 of the Wakf act, 1995 and pass such other order or orders…” 2. Head learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 3. The case of the petitioner herein is that respondent No.1/ Board, District Revenue Officer & District Wakf Officer is not implementing the orders passed respondent No.2 vide proceedings dated 13.01.2016. Hence, the writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pending writ petition, respondent No.1 considered the proceedings of the respondent No.2 dated 13.01.2016 and removed respondent No.4 and took over the management of the subject mosque. Therefore, the grievance of the petitioner was redressed by the respondents. Hence, the cause in the present writ petition does not survive for further adjudication and the matter becomes infructuous. 5. Recording the said submission, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ___________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J Dated:18.02.2025 BSP 123 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO.6057 OF 2016 Dated:18.02.2025 BSP