i $ IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY ,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA X' WRIT PETITION NO: 23362 OF 2017 Between: 1. Shaik Noor Saheb, S/o. Md. Usman, Aged about 54 years, Occ; Superintendent/ Inspector. Auditor. Waqfs, W.G. District A.P. State Waqf Board, Imdad Ghar, 4th floor, Opp; Head Post Office, Kaleswara Rao Market, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 2. Mohd. Deshai, S/o. Late Hussain Deshai, Aged 57 years, Occ: Superintendent/ Inspector. Auditor. Waqfs. District Collecotrate Office, Anantapur District 3. Syed Adam Shafi, S/o. Syed Yakub Aged about 56 years, Occ; Superintendent/I .A., A.P. State Waqf Board, Collectorate, Ongole, Prakasam District. 4. Shaik Hassan Ahmed, S/o. Shaik Moula Saheb, Aged about 59 years, Occ: Superintendent, A.P. State Waqf Board, Haj House Building, Opp: Public Gardens, Nampally, Hyderabad. 5. Saleem Mohd., S/o. Late Abdul Kareem, Aged about 56 years, Occ: Superintendent, A.P. State Waqf Board, Haj House Building, Opp; Public Gardens, Nampally, Hyderabad. 6. M.Ahmed Basha, S/o. Late M. Dare Saheb, Aged about 57 years, Occ: Superintendent/ Liason Assistant, A.P. Waqf Tribunal A.P. State Waqf Haj House Building, Opp: Public Gardens, Nampally, Board Hyderabad. 7. Mohd. Shamshuddin, S/o. Late Meera Khan, Aged about 56 years, Occ: Superintendent, A.P. State Waqf Board, Haj House Building, Opp: Public Gardens, Nampally, Hyderabad. ...Petitioners AND 1. The Chief Executive Officer, A.P.State Waqf Board, Haj House Building, Opp; Public Gardens, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2. The Competent Authority, A.P. State Waqf Board, Haj House Building, Opp: Public Gardens, Nampally, Hyderabad. 3. Sri Shaik Jeelani, Superintendent, A.P. State Waqf Board, Haj House Building, Opp; Public Gardens, Nampally, Hyderabad. 4. Sri Shaik Mohd. Ali, Superintendent, A.P. State Waqf Board, Haj House Building, Opp: Public Gardens, Nampally, Hyderabad. 5. Secretary to Government, Minorities Welfare Department, Secretariat, 3rd Block, Velagapudi, Thullur (M), Guntur District. 6. The Director, Directorate of State Audit (L.F), Government of A.P., Hyderabad. 7. The Assistant Audit Officer, Directorate of State Audit, (camped at A.P. State Waqf Board, Hyderabad), Government of A.P., Hyderabad. ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly 7 one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, by declaring the action of the 1 respondent in assigning notional seniority to the 3'"' and respondents vide impugned proceedings F.No.E1/26/2016-A.P. 17-6-2017 without issuing notice or offending opportunity to the petitioner, though the said respondents do not possess the required and essential qualification to hold the post of U.D. Steno or Superintendent as being arbitrary, illegal, opposed to Principles of natural justice, contrary to Rules and seniority void abinitio and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, consequently hold that the petitioners are seniors to the unofficial respondents and be considered and promoted as Assistant Secretaries preference to the claim of the 3'^'^ and 4^*^ respondents with all incidental benefits in the interest of justice and to pass such other order or orders as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper. St I.A. NO: 1 OF 2017fWPMP. NO: 28848 OF 2017) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of impugned proceedings issued by the 1®‘ respondent in F.No.E1/26/2016-AP dated 17-6-2017 and direct the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners for promotion as Assistant Secretaries along with other qualified candidates. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI D LINGA RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: SRI SHAIK KHAJA BASHA Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 5 & 6: GP FOR SERVICES -1 Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 & 4: ~ Counsel for the Respondent No.7: GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING (AP)/ The Court made the following: APHC010333902017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 23362/2017 Between: Shaik Noor Saheb & 6 Ors. and Others AND ...PETITIONER{S) CEO APSWB Hyd and 6 Others Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.DLINGARAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.M.R. MOHAMMAD IRFAN(SC FOR AP WAQF BOARD ) 2.GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE (AP) 3.S M SUBHANI (SC FOR AP WAKF BOARD) 4.P VRAMANA 5.SHAIK KHAJA BASHA e.GP'FOR FINANCE PLANNING (AP) ...RESPONDENT(S) The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioners seeking indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: "... to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of the 1^ respondent in assigning notional seniority to the and 4^'^ respondents vide impugned proceedings F.No.El/26/2016-A.P. 17.6.2017 without issuing notice or offending opportunity to the petitioner though the said respondents do not possess the required and essential qualification to hold the post of U.D.Steno or Superintendent as being arbitrary, illegal, opposed to Principles of natural justice, contrary to Rules and seniority void abinitio and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently, hold that the petitioners are seniors to the unofficial respondents and be considered and promoted as Assistant Secretaries preference to the claim of the 3' respondents with all incidental benefits in the interest of justice." and 4' 2 2. The earlier Docket the Petitioners and the "For Dismissal". Proceedings would show that matter was directed to be none represented for listed today under the caption 3. Despite the matter being listed represented for the Petitioners under the caption "For dismissal". none today. 4. Learned Government Pleader for Services-I is in attendance. 5. In that view, the Writ Petition i order as to costs. IS dismissed for non-prosecution. No Pending applications, if any, shall Pending applications, if any. stand closed, shall stan^ closed. Sd/- J SAROJA assistant R^EGISTRAR OFFICER //TkUE COPY/7 To, SEC 1. One CC to SRI. D UNGA RAO, Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to SRI. SHAIK KHAJA BASHA^ 3. Two CCS to GP FOft FINANCE Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 4. Two CCS to GP FOR SERVICES [OUT] 5. Three CD Copies Advocate [OPUC] PLANNING (AP) ,High Court Of - I .High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. sree HIGH COURT DATED:26/03/2025 ORDER WP.No.23362 of 2017 2 'I SEP 2025 o» rrentSectioii.X>^' DISMISSING THE W.P. FOR NON-PROSECUTION WITHOUT COSTS