APHC010042892024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 3789 OF 2024 Between: 1. SAYYAD VALYUDDIN, S/o S.Nooruddin, Aged 47 Yrs, Occ Care Taker of Tahar Ahmed Masjid, R/o 5-2b, Near Main Bajar, Gargeyapuram Village, Kurnool Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Petitioner AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Minorities and Wakf Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Chief Executive Officer, AP State Wakf Board, Kaleswara Rao Market, Vijayawada, NTR District. 3. The Inspector Auditor of Waqf, District Waqf Board, Kurnool, Kurnool District, Andhra Pradesh. 4. Shaik Shakir Basha S/o Shaik Hajam Miah, aged 67 years, Occ Cultivation, R/o D.No.2-107, Kota Street, Gargeyapuram village, Kurnool Mandal, Kurnool District 5. Syed Shamiullah S/o S Sajid Basha, aged 32 years, Occ Cultivation, R/o D.No.2-107, Kota Street, Gargeyapuram village, Kurnool Mandal, Kurnool District. RR 4 and 5 are impleaded as per the Court Order dt.02.05.2024 vide orders passed in I.A.No.02 of 2024. ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: SUBRAMANYAM DARABOINA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE (AP) Counsel for the Respondents:D KRISHNA MURTHY Counsel for the 2 Respondents:MOHAMMED GAYASUDDIN Counsel for the Respondents:SHAIK KHAJA BASHA The Court made the following ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri R. Venkatesh, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Subramanyam Daraboina, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner; Sri D. Krishna Murthy, learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5; Sri Shaik Khaja Basha, learned Standing Counsel for Waqf Board. 2. The present Writ Petition is filed seeking following relief: “……..to issue a writ order of direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the illegal action of the Respondent No.2 in trying to evict and dispossess the Petitioner from the Taher Ahmed Masjid Attached Property for an extent of Ac.21-18 cts in Sy. No.88/2, situated at Gargeyapuram (V), Kurnool Mandal and District, which is illegal, arbitrary and also violation of Article 21 & 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondent Nos.2 not to dispossess and disturb the peaceful possession of the Petitioner from the Taher Ahmed Masjid Attached Property and also to direct the Respondents to appoint the Petitioner as a Mutawalli to the Taher Ahmed Masjid and pass such other order or orders in the interest of the justice.” 3. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner has placed on record the Gazette Notification dated 24.10.1963 (Ex.P.5). He would contend that the subject property has been donated by the forefathers of the Writ Petitioner. On the death of his father one Sri Nooruddin, who was serving as hereditary Mutawalli, the Writ Petitioner would be entitled to inherit the said position. Learned Counsel would also submit that the other siblings of the Writ Petitioner have no objection to continue the Writ Petitioner as hereditary Mutawalli in place of his late father Sri Nooruddin. 4. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the Proceeding of the Waqf Board dated 10.07.2023 (Ex.P.10), which indicates that Sri Nooruddin had been appointed as Mutawalli. A rival claim has been made by the Respondent Nos.4 & 5 by filing Impleadment Application vide I.A.No.2 of 2024, which stood allowed on 02.05.2024. 3 5. Sri D. Krishna Murthy, learned Counsel for the impleaded private Respondent Nos.4 & 5 has drawn the attention of this Court to the Gazette Notification dated 24.10.1963. He would submit that the claim made by the Writ Petitioner as well as the Waqf Board that the subject property belong to the Waqfs and that the ancestors of the Writ Petitioner have donated the land to the Waqfs are factually incorrect, inasmuch as the Gazette Notification dated 23.10.1963 does not include the subject property in the Gazette Notification dated 24.10.1963. 6. Learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5 has also drawn the attention to the Proceedings of the Chief Executive Officer of the Waqf Board dated 09.03.2022 (Ex.P.7) indicating the requirement of issuing an Errata for including the subject properties in the A.P Gazettee, which includes an extent of Ac.21.18 cents in Sy.No.88/2, an extent of Ac.22.37 cents in Sy.No.337 and an extent of Ac.4.63 cents in Sy.No.727 of Gargeyapuram Village, Kurnool Rural Mandal & District. The Respondent Nos.4 & 5 would contend that they are in occupation of the said property on the strength of the registered Sale Deeds noted below: S.No. Vendor Purchaser Extent Doc.No. Dated 1 Kesu Mia Abbas Mia 3.00 76/1924 22.01.1924 2 Shahajadi Bi Abbas Mia 5.50 640/1946 07.04.1946 3 Rahamtullah Bi Abbas Mia 3.00 5/1953 02.01.1953 4 Shahabas Bi Shakir Basha Shahadath Basha 3.00 1621/1961 31.07.1961 7. Learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5 has submitted an Order passed by this Court dated 20.11.2023 in W.P.No.22529 of 2018. The said Writ Petition has been filed by the Respondent Nos.4 & 5 herein against the Social Welfare Department, State of A.P; A.P. State Waqf Board and the Inspector of Waqfs. The said Writ Petition is filed seeking a protection against the threat of dispossession of an extent of Ac.2.78 cents, Ac.3.00 cents, Ac.5.50 cents and Ac.3.00 cents, totally admeasuring Ac.14.28 cents in Sy.No.88 situated at Gargeyapurm Village, Kurnool Mandal and District. 4 Learned Single Judge of this Court, having considered the contents of the Counter Affidavit filed by the Waqf Board, had disposed of the said Writ Petition with a direction to the Respondents therein to follow the due process of law. 8. Sri Shaik Khaja Basha, learned Standing Counsel for Waqf Board would submit that since the Waqf Board has not been constituted so far, the Writ Petitioner herein could not be confirmed as hereditary Mutawalli accordingly to law. 9. It is the contention of the learned Counsel appearing for Respondent Nos.4 & 5 that so long as the subject property has not been notified under the A.P Gazettee and also by virtue of the Proceeding dated 09.03.2022 (Ex.P.7), a request has been made by the Chief Executive Officer of Waqf Board to take steps to have an Errata issued for including the property described therein in the A.P Gazette, prima-facie, it cannot be held that the property would vest in the Waqf Board and so long as the property has not vested in the Waqf Board, which goes without saying that the Waqf Board would have no domain or control over the said property including appointment of hereditary Mutawalli. 10. However, this Court has only stated the position of law but has not decided the rights of any of the parties either with regard to the entitlement of the Writ Petitioner to continue as hereditary Mutawalli or the entitlement of Respondent Nos.4 & 5 as owners of the property on the strength of their Sale Deeds. These matters are to be considered upon proper appreciation of evidence by the competent Forum. 11. In this view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to entertain this Writ Petition. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. The Interim Order granted on 14.02.2024 stands vacated. No Order as to Costs. 5 12. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 09.09.2025 JKS 6 375 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION No. 3789 OF 2024 09.09.2025 JKS