APHC010709542022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] MONDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 41805/2022 Between: 1. DARGAH HAZRATH BABA FAKHRUDDIN, REP. BY ITS HEREDITARY NOTIFIED MUTHAWALLI AND SADAR SAJJADA NASHEEN K.S.S. BABA RUKNODDIN AHMED HUSSAINI SOHARWARDI @ TAJ BABA, S/O. K.S.S. BABA ABDAL HUSSAINI, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/O. DARGAH PET, PENUKONDA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, A.P. 515110. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,AMARAVATHI. 2. THE PENUKONDA NAGAR PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, PENUKONDA TOWN AND MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT, A.P. 3. THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE WAKF BOARD, REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, 4TH AND 5TH FLOOR, IMDADGHAR WAKF COMPLEX, OPP K R MARKET, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT, A.P. 4. THE INSPECTOR AUDITOR WAKFS, , SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT, OFFICE AT COLLECTORATE COMPOUND, PUTTAPARTHI, A.P ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SUBHANI S M Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV 2. N RANGA REDDY (SC MC RSEEMA SPSR NLR) 3. SHAIK KHAJA BASHA The Court made the following: 3 ORDER:- The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the 2nd respondent in taking into account the objections of respondent Nos. 3 and 4 while issuing the notice pertaining to the auction of various properties, including the property which is under the control of respondent Nos. 3 and 4. It is submitted that the property belongs to the petitioner’s Dargah. 2. It is submitted that the 2nd respondent issued a public notice dated 23.12.2022 calling for tenders to allot the open area for parking for the Urs Festival, which was scheduled to be held for a period of 30 days in December, 30 days in January, and in February 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 2nd respondent issued the tender notice without mentioning the survey number. 3. This Court, while admitting the writ petition, directed the 2nd respondent to duly consider the representations/applications of the petitioner and the 4th respondent within a period of two (02) days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. It is submitted that, although the proposed tender could not be materialized, the 2nd respondent has not disposed of the petitioner’s representation as directed by this Court. 4. It is submitted that the petitioner is only confining the prayer of the writ petition to the extent of directing the 2nd respondent to duly take into account the objections of the petitioner if the 2nd respondent intends to float any further 4 tenders for parking purposes or for any other purposes on any other land belonging to the petitioner. 5. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submits that the writ petition no longer survives and prays for its dismissal. 6. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent, the 2nd respondent is directed to take into consideration the representations/applications of both the petitioner and the 4th respondent whenever the 2nd respondent intends to issue any further or fresh tenders with regard to any properties belonging to the petitioner and the 4th respondent. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed off. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 04.08.2025 PNS